Would the Speaker support impeachment if Trump shot someone on Fifth Ave?

[polichick]

...or ordered a nuclear attack?

Every day the narcissist/traitor/sociopath in the WH defiles the office, the Constitution, our democracy, our allies, and the planet. We don’t need further documents, or even the Mueller report, to prove it - he does it out in the open because there are no consequences.

What would it take for the Speaker to LEAD our nation out of this existential mess?

“Pelosi told House Democrats on a conference call Friday, “The public isn’t there on impeachment.””

https://www.apnews.com/347a9835cb994b16915df056f39ab4d7

The oath Democratic leaders took included a pledge to protect the Constitution - and did not include a pledge to hold a finger up to the political winds. If the Speaker won’t lead the public toward justice, she should get out of the way so that someone else will do what must be done to save this democracy.

Edited to add a link to this related story - the writer makes a lot of good points:
https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/Open-Forum-Why-I-heckled-Nancy-Pelosi-14376667.php

[Elwood P Dowd]

1. Probably not, but at least Senator Susan Collins would express deep concern

and ask us all to pray for the victims.

[bluestarone]

2. I'm sure the Senate WOULD NOT! BUT

Then the house should put it on their shoulders! Fuck the senate!

[Kurt V.]

3. the speaker does not support impeachment and i don't see that changing.

[empedocles]

4. The key is the voting public. Seems like it would be trump's Pearl Harbor. Huge turning point.

[onenote]

5. Would you have the Speaker call for a vote if it was going to be defeated?

I'm guessing she has a much better idea of how many votes there are at this point than anyone at DU.

[polichick]

12. Absolutely - the House has a duty, despite the corruption of the Senate...

I just added a link to a related piece written by Karen Fleshman, one of Pelosi’s hecklers. She says:

“Pelosi is not only failing to fulfill her moral and constitutional responsibilities, but also making a huge political error that will make Trump’s re-election more likely.

Democratic presidential candidate Julián Castro put it well during last month’s debate: “What’s going to happen in ... 2020, if they don’t impeach him, is he going to say, ‘You see. You see. The Democrats didn’t go after me on impeachment. And you know why? Because I didn’t do anything wrong.’”

Conversely, if the House does impeach the president and the Senate acquits him, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell can be held responsible. We’ll be able to say, “They impeached him in the House, but his friend Moscow Mitch let him off the hook.””

[onenote]

28. So you think that having the House vote on and defeat an impeachment resolution

would be a good thing?

[polichick]

31. Upholding the law and their oaths of office would be the RIGHT thing...

and being a leader means you have to LEAD others to do the right thing.

A horrible precedent is being set.

[onenote]

35. Holding a vote and then losing it would be a far worse precedent.

[cwydro]

6. Lol, excellent question.

I seriously doubt it.

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

7. Impeaching Trump for shooting someone would violate his Second Amendment rights.

I imagine the NRA would argue that owning a nuke would fall under the protections of that amendment.

Besides, hasn't Barr, the DOJ and Kavanaugh all given a president (or at least a Republican president) carte blanche to do as they will without being held criminally liable so long as they hold office?

BTW, Trump has said multiple times that he thinks he shouldn't be limited to two terms...

[Gothmog]

8. The state of New York could bring criminal charges against trump

The DOJ policy does not apply to state crimes

[treestar]

9. The public would be demanding it enough that she would

At least, I hope the public would be demanding it.

[spanone]

10. any day we're going to hear.....'well, it's just too late now'

[polichick]

13. If that happens, voters will have another reason to distrust establishment Dems.

[uponit7771]

16. +1

[JI7]

11. holding a vote on impeachment right now isn't going to bring justice

contract members of Congress to see where they stand on impeachment and convince them to support it.

[Xtermin8 H8]

14. What actually would happen if he did that. After Mueller, it's really hard to say. Would he

continue to be president until his term is completed?

He may already be an accessory.

[Bettie]

15. No, she probably wouldn't

I honestly don't think there is anything he could do that would cause her to move forward.

I fear that the next election's theme is going to be "See, I'm 100% innocent, even Nancy Pelosi saw I have done nothing wrong, or she'd have done impeachment".

But, soon it will be "too close to the election" rather than "the public isn't there yet".

I call my congresscritter regularly (weekly, daily seems like too much). I was planning on going to a town hall, but oddly, there have been zero announced events during this recess period, just a few private events. I don't think she wants to hear about impeachment.

[jalan48]

17. We spent two years analyzing every Mueller move and now it seems like a forgotten dream. I think

we've lost our steam on the impeachment debate.

[JHB]

18. And what is the plan to move public opinion?

The Republicans know how to do this; it's why they hold endless hearings and re-re-re-re-investigate every flyblown "scandal" of Democratic pols and administrations. They drive public opinion by throwing turdballs and even if none of them stick they point at the foul mess at the Democrat's feet and then at the fogbank of steam rising from it and intone "where there's smoke there's fire".

The accusations against Trump aren't turdballs, they're the real thing. They'll stick, they just have to be out where people can see them and can't escape them. Every. Single. Day. Drive the news cycle.

I'm willing to delay my chomping at the bit by hoping that Pelosi is taking a cynical page from the Bush playbook: "Never launch a new product in August", but we're running out of August. Public hearings have to start soon, because this will take months. It has to become an issue for the election, getting the Republicans to pay a price if they keep stonewalling.

If the plan is just to "wait for the election and vote him out", then it doesn't confront the Republicans and lets them paint everything as "just playing politics". The "there" the public will be at is "the Democrats won't fight."

[polichick]

20. As the heckler mentioned, Pelosi was celebrated for clapping at Trump...

at a $300 per person fundraiser - while our country is being pillaged and our gov’t destroyed.

If Pelosi doesn’t respond to the crisis as if it actually is a crisis, she will be just another complicit enabler, and your’re right - The “there” the public will be at is “the Democrats won’t fight.”

[lame54]

19. What do you mean if?...

Amongst Trump's numerous numerous lies are actual confessions

Trump tower is on 5th ave

[standingtall]

21. If she isn't in support of impeaching Trump with over half of Democrats

in favor of an impeachment inquiry then she never will. If Trump shot someone on fifth avenue we would hear the same excuse. "The public isn't there yet." As long as Congressional leadership has that attitude the public will never be there.

[onenote]

26. It isn't a question of whether she supports it, it is whether there are enough votes for it to pass

At the moment, there is no reason to believe the votes are there. Calling for a vote and the losing it? Bad bad idea.

[standingtall]

32. Her public support for impeachment and calling for a vote on it are two different things

and her public support for it would encourage other Democrats to come out for impeachment. Not to mention it is also part of her job to get the rest of the votes too.

[onenote]

34. Maybe. Maybe not.

She's a lightning rod. And there are a significant number of Democrats in the House that need to show their independence from her to continue to hold support in their districts. Sad. But true.

[brooklynite]

22. How will Impeaching Trump "lead us out of this existential mess"?

The Senate won't convict him. He'll still be President, and probably be worse since he'll have been "acquitted".

We get rid of him on Election Day.

[zackymilly]

23. Why do you always have to be the voice of reason? n/t

[polichick]

24. By her lack of action Speaker Pelosi is normalizing a criminal administration...

Last edited Tue Aug 27, 2019, 05:59 PM - Edit history (1)

She is not honoring her oath of office, and is not leading the people.

The next election will be more rigged than the last - what a great idea it was to leave the Supreme Court to the last pres. election!

[onenote]

27. Whose idea was it to "leave the Supreme Court to the last election"?

[polichick]

37. Voters who felt it was important to protest Moscow Mitch's stealing...

of a SC seat were shot down by establishment Dems in the Obama administration because they were so sure Clinton would win.

Counting on the next election to fix what’s wrong now is even more foolish given all we know.

[onenote]

39. Link?

And if "voters who felt it was important" felt it was really important, they would have gone ahead and protested. Not that it would have made any difference. McConnell wasn't bringing up the nomination no matter what.

[Falcata]

36. The last election

we took over the House. How was that possible?

[polichick]

38. Sorry, I meant the last pres. election. Will edit.

[standingtall]

25. How does letting Trump get off scot-free lead us out of this mess?

How does telling our base of about 70% Democrats supporting impeachment to forget it help us in an election year. What are we saying to the next person who is like Trump who gets elected? Go ahead and try and steal the election we wont even try to hold you accountable as long republicans and 35% the country support you?

[Stinky The Clown]

29. Thank you for sewing discord in the ranks of Democrats

This post is NOT helpful.

MASSIVE UNREC

[polichick]

33. Some Democratic voters still put country and justice over the game of politics.

[Stinky The Clown]

40. Impeachment is by definition political. Lots of pomp and ceremony around it, but still, at its core

. . . . it's just politics.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

30. It depends. Which block? NT

[UTUSN]

41. The Speaker is Democratic (meaning "of integrity") and yes *would* do the correct thing.

Thanks for asking.

[GulfCoast66]

42. Good god. She is selling him rope by the yard and he keeps buying!

A failed impeachment would give him a win. And it would fail. Even in the House of Representatives. There are some votes you can’t whip. That’s the biggest. We just won the House by winning districts that had been republican by focusing on bread and butter issues. No way in hell they are voting for impeachment. They want us to keep talking about what Democrats will do for Americans!

But even assuming he could be impeached, which he can’t, he will never be convicted. So it is all emotional bullshit talking about it.

It is and has always been about 2020. Nothing else matters. Never has.