@AOC:

[dajoki]

Link to tweet

?s=20

[dchill]

1. Logical.

Live long and prosper, AOC!

[TheBlackAdder]

19. Also, it goes down in the history books as to who sided with foreign adversaries.

[dchill]

33. Yes. That's logical, too.

[HelpImSurrounded]

2. Correct.

Do not let them squirm out of it.

[Guilded Lilly]

3. Accountability. Absolutely.

[Bettie]

4. Lay the corruption out in the bright light of day

and then hang it around their necks.

They explicitly support corruption.

She's right.

[ehrnst]

11. Their constituents won't see it as corruption - they will see it as loyalty.

You really think that a Democratic House led impeachment is going to be accepted by red states and districts as anything but an attack on them? Especially when he gets "exonerated" by the Senate?

You think any person who doesn't think Trump is a crook now will be convinced by Democrats going after him?

Trump has an 88% approval rating among republican voters. GOP senators who haven't already gotten out are going to JUMP at the chance to have that vote on their record going into their next campaign.

Do you ever hear McConnell talking about the "danger" of impeachment to our country?

Why do you think that is?

[brutus smith]

24. Do you really think that red states are going to vote for a Dem?

It doesn't matter what we do to them. Impeach now! 😁

[ehrnst]

45. Actually, some have elected Democratic Senators. So, yes it matters.

Google the following: Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.), Joe Manchin (W.Va.) and Jon Tester (D-Mont.) Say what you will about them, they are all preferable to any Susan Collins.

Perhaps you have forgotten what happened to Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.) in 2018 after she voted no to the Kavanaugh confirmation.

You may also want to google what the constitution states is neccessary to "impeach now!" But for your convenience here it is:

They need a majority of the House to vote yes. As of this week, there are 217 Democrats (plus independent Justin Amash) on board —which means they must gather at least 87 more commitments by the end of the year. There are currently 235 Democrats.

If they were to vote to impeach NOW! without those commitments, the vote to impeach fails.

You truly believe that's something that would be helpful?




My understanding is that an inquiry is being called. That may not be red meat enough for some, but there is a process for these, no matter how little instant gratification if offers.

[brutus smith]

47. I believe these congressmen should uphold the law

Time for them to shit or get off the pot.

[Kid Berwyn]

5. THEN the voters can decide.

The GOP will be history.

[johnnyfins]

6. repub voters dont give a sh*t

as long as the librulz are getting owned, all is well.

[ehrnst]

12. Yep.

[sharedvalues]

40. Nah. Repub voters are being lied to about corruption

Fox and Limbaugh hide and/or lie about Republican corruption and criminality. That’s why the voters don’t care. They don’t know, or they think falsely that Dems are worse. Because they are being lied to.

[KPN]

7. Exactly. And Democrats will be looked upon as those who tried to save our nation's democracy,

the global economy and the global security that goes along with it, and the earth (as long as there is a history at least).

[ehrnst]

9. And Blue Senators in red states will lose their seat if they vote that way

See also: The Kavanaugh confirmation.

As will Blue Congresspersons in swing districts.

Dems will be looked upon as caring more about what the history books wrote about them than actually saving the country by taking back the Senate and keeping the House....for an impeachment that won't shorten his time in office, or prevent him from doing anything other than overreacting, and possibly starting a war or Reichstag Fire to distract.

[ehrnst]

8. That will be a plus for them in the eyes of their constituents. They will JUMP at the chance.

Trump has an 88% approval rating among Republicans. There will be no shame for them - just keeping their seats and lots of cheers the next time they go back home.

Why do you think that McConnell isn't banging the drum against impeachment? It's a win-win for the GOP.

[brutus smith]

26. Who cares what Moscow Mitch thinks?

[ehrnst]

42. I'm talking about paying attention what he *says* and *doesn't say.*

Sensible people pay attention to enemies because ignoring them gives them an advantage, yes?

You can tell who and what the GOP is threatened by with observation. If they attack a particular candidate - as Moscow Mitch and the GOP did HRC - that indicates a strategy designed to damage her chances, which we know was Russia's preference. If they don't attack a Dem opponent, then you know they prefer that candidate to win, which as the Mueller investigation found was also Russia's preference.

So, you see, if Moscow Mitch, who speaks for the GOP in the Senate isn't trying to gin up opposition to impeachment, that indicates a strategy that sees impeachment as a good scenario for the GOP. Which might also be Russia's preference.

It would be similarly foolish to ignore Trump tweets, because "why should we care?"

Is that clearer?

[melman]

34. "Why do you think that McConnell isn't banging the drum against impeachment"

This makes no sense whatsoever. Why would he be banging that drum when nothing's happening?

[ehrnst]

44. Perhaps you didn't read the OP? There is discussion of impeachment going on.

So, yes, that's what's happening that he could be "banging the drum against."

Perhaps you've missed the many posts and discussions concerning impeachment here on DU.

And perhaps you missed that Nadler has announced an impeachment probe.

Maybe this will make more sense to you - remember when Mitch and the GOP were banging the drum about "Benghazi scandal" to harm HRC's candidacy for POTUS, even when she hadn't yet announced it? That's what I'm talking about.

They're doing the opposite in this case. If they wanted to neutralize impeachment, they'd be treating it like a potential HRC candidacy, doing what they could to discredit the idea. They'd be doing way, way more than simply saying that it wouldn't get past the Senate.

They don't stand by when they think that something is a potential threat to their power. They make offensive strikes, play dirty (see also Al Franken). The only think that McConnell has said in response is that it won't even get a vote in the Senate. Nada trying to discredit an impeachment process from going forward in Congress.

Is that clearer?

[Hermit-The-Prog]

39. Moscow Mitch is a poor compass to set course by

[ehrnst]

43. Didn't say he was a compass. More like an indicator.

To ignore what he's saying is foolish, because he often is the mouthpiece for the party.

Is that clearer?

[ffr]

10. History will not view republicans well. Dark days.

AOC

[calimary]

14. Same for Pelosi this if she keeps dragging her feet on this.

A spotless record, except for a single big one.

[ffr]

15. I disagree. She's always been on the right side of history, so I'll trust her judgement

I don't know what she knows.

[bucolic_frolic]

13. Moscow Mitch will Merrick Garland any impeachment referral

Republicans are suffocating democracy

[backscatter712]

18. If the House votes to impeach, the Senate must hold the trial.

Which means the strategy is to have hearings starting now, make things heat up red hot in the spring, vote to impeach about mid-summer or so, and ideally, force the Senate to hold the vote to convict or acquit in mid-October. Right before the election.

[bucolic_frolic]

31. "The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments."

Where does it say they have to use or execute that power? Mitch won't do this. Period.

[warmfeet]

16. K & R

[spanone]

17. I agree 1000%

[CaptainTruth]

20. And make them do it while they (& Trump) are campaigning for reelection.

[SCVDem]

21. It starts like this...

I pledge allegiance, to the flag, of the United States of America. This is not an option!

Not trump or the republicans.

If you don't agree with that you should lose your citizenship.

What say you republican Congress people?

[zentrum]

22. AOC for President in 2028!

[BeyondGeography]

28. Looking forward to it

[yuiyoshida]

23. LOVE me some AOC!

[brutus smith]

25. She gives life to the party

The Debby downers who don't want to impeach are the go along get along crowd.

[kxs]

32. Equal stain on Dems careers who DON'T act...

This is not rocket science, Dems. Plus not doing anything turns into a massive negative - that will be a stain on YOUR careers for the rest of YOUR lives...

@AOC: "I want to see every Republican go on the record and knowingly vote against impeachment of this President, knowing his corruption, having it on the record so that they can have that stain on their careers rest of their lives because this is outrageous.
Via The Hill

[triron]

35. +1000 even democrats high up the food chain, especially them.

[Skittles]

37. absolutely right on, kxs

welcome to DU

[Skittles]

36. CORRECT!

[kyburbonkid]

38. My thoughts exactly...

Make the rethugs go on record for what they are... corrupt POS.

[intrepidity]

41. Me too! nt

[Recursion]

46. I mean, it will help the Republicans in their primaries, probably

I don't think it's actively harmful but the idea that this will be a negative thing for Republicans kind of misses the point.

[Ingersollman]

48. Exactly

this. I agree with AOC! Get them on the record as supporting this grotesque clown. Hang it around their necks like the proverbial albatross. Never forget. Never let them live it down.

She will make a great President one day.