Pelosi: "Impeachment off the table" ....again??? WTF??

[tomhagen]

Harsh words on Stump; but once again softpedaling Impeachment

[secondwind]

1. I have to agree with her on this.. if he is found to have broken any law(s), that is another

can of worms... I like that she called him "reckless"

[DK504]

15. Emoluments clause.

[The Wielding Truth]

38. That's one big law he has broken for starters. He is not above the law!

[yeoman6987]

27. She made a mistake and said she couldn't work with president bush

I don't know why she did that.

[diva77]

42. I took it as a Freudian slip!! (very telling one!!) nt

[heaven05]

2. figures

[BlueCaliDem]

3. Welcome to DU.

[unblock]

4. she doesn't get it. i agree impeachment won't happen, but that's beside the point.

the point is to object forcefully at every opportunity at an evil presidency whose one saving grace is that it's monumentally incompetent.

whether donnie breaks laws is irrelevant because the republican-controlled congress won't impeach and remove their own leader. they'd much, much sooner pressure him into resigning. not that they're eager to do that, either.

but they certainly won't pressure him into resigning unless democrats are screaming from the rooftops that he's got to go.

and crying "impeachment" is the strongest way to do that, even if a formal impeachment and removal process isn't the actual mechanism that will ultimately get us rid of donnie.

[Merlot]

9. The old "she doesn't get it"

She just doesn't have the brain poer to comprehend what's really going on. She doesn't have the experience to see what's in front of her. She's out of her league.

Poor lady!

[unblock]

12. um, none of that.

i just happen to disagree with her on this position.

and i'm hardly alone on this.

other than on this position, i rather like pelosi.

[cstanleytech]

29. Personally I think she gets it just fine because to be honest he hasnt really dont anything yet

that would force the hand of the Repugnants to support impeachment.

[Mike Nelson]

5. It is off the table...

...for two years, unless Republicans decide to remove him from office in favor of Pence.

[riversedge]

6. Did she use those words?? 'off the table?

[Paladin]

8. ...or did she stick to her old reliable "let's keep our powder dry"?

Either one indicates that the party membership is rapidly outpacing what passes for its leadership. If initiating impeachment proceedings isn't feasible right now, it certainly ought to be a clearly-articulated ASAP goal. All that's at stake is our country.

[Merlot]

10. Impeachement for impeachment's sake should not be the goal

That's what the repubs did to Bill Clinton.

However, finding an impeachable offense, keeping pressure on his many unethical positions and speaking out about them loudly and consistenly should be party policy.

[tazkcmo]

13. Mental illness.

Gross incompetence. Loss of confidence.

All impeachable offenses or reasons for removal. She's smart, experienced and tough but I disagree with her on this. Impeachment is absolutely needed to save our country.

The word should be said by every Democratic Congress person in every statement, every day. The time to use that dry powder is NOW!

[TimeToGo]

24. Well . . .

Those (Gross incompetence. Loss of confidence) aren't actually impeachable offenses. Now, that doesn't mean there aren't (or won't) be high crimes and misdemeanors.

[cstanleytech]

30. Those are not impeachable though they could trigger article 25 but even then you would need alot of

the Repugnants to get on board with it and thats not going to happen as long as they think they can get what they want out of him.

[tazkcmo]

33. I accept that, too

I just do not agree with Rep Pelosi using language regarding impeachment that can be seen as weak or defeatist. Contrast Rep Pelosi's statements with Rep Waters' statements. For me, it's a matter of optics and tactics. Start the drum beat now. The word "impeach" needs to be heard all over the airwaves, in almost any context, just to begin associating the word with Shit Gibbon.

[Merlot]

34. I'd rather wait for breaking of the law with hard evidence

repubs will never admit to gross incompetence, mental illness, etc. They've already proven that via ronnie. That's how they play.

[Paladin]

14. trump has taken a number of impeachment-worthy actions already.

He will continue to do so. No president in this country's history has proceeded beyond the "impeachment for impeachment's sake" barrier with more rapidity or thoughtlessness. I want party leaders ready to take decisive action when the time comes---not to issue public comments about their reluctance to do so. Pelosi would do us all a service by being quiet.

[DK504]

17. Very true

however the media refuse to dig through the Russian connections and the tax bullshit. They need to be ALL over Comey for tampering with the election.

[Paladin]

20. The fact that Comey still has that job is a national disgrace.

In 90% of the world's countries, he would be behind bars---if he was lucky.

[tazkcmo]

25. This.

I agree some bigly percentage.

[riversedge]

47. I agree, I think there is too much idle talk of impeachment at this point. As others have

said-need hard evidence and hope Dems and outside groups are collecting it. Just my take on it.

[diva77]

43. She didn't say it was off the table -- just not the subject of her news conference -

that's how I interpreted what she said

[riversedge]

48. Thanks.

[BeyondGeography]

7. Pelosi isn't in a position to rename a street after a moderate Republican right now

This is silly.

[Amaryllis]

11. There is also the 25th amendment where he is declared incompetent which seems like a better option.

Republicans could do this either via impeachment, a protracted process that plays out while a wounded Trump can do even more impulsive and vengeful damage. Or they could move more quickly via the 25th Amendment to have Trump certified as impaired, and take him out in a net.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/march-to-impeachment_us_5897b401e4b0406131376a32

[bdamomma]

19. apparently the repigs are

morons and accomplices.

This will not stand. We will FIGHT BACK.

[cstanleytech]

31. Wont happen unless the Repugnants dont think he will sign what they order him to sign when

they order him to sign it at which point they might decide to trigger it depending on what they ordered him to sign so that Pence can sign it.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

16. because trying to impeach him and failing shows incompetence

and pelosi does not want to portray imcompetence

elections have consequences and the consequence we have is that we have lost the house, Senate, and white house.

[tazkcmo]

26. I agree

But expressing doubt publicly only serves to embolden the GOPee. They read it as permission to do even more evil, not less. At a minimum, I would prefer to hear statements more in line with Rep Waters rhetoric. I'm not asking for an out right declaration (I believe it's warranted now but I defer to actual lawyers) but don't back off of it either. I feel that every Democratic official should be using the word "impeachment" in every discussion concerning Herr Twittler von Shit Gibbon as a possibility, something to look into, likely or some such framing. Here, Pelosi does the opposite, imo.

[bdamomma]

18. If they are waiting for 2018

they are highly mistaken.

This needs to be resolved now.

[2naSalit]

21. I agree,

we can waste no more time correcting this gross error.

[Initech]

39. We can't afford to wait for 2018.

If we want to be known as the anti-Trump party we have to attack NOW. We can't wait.

[Crash2Parties]

22. It's like she has a pull-string on her back when it comes to GOP Presidents...

[bdamomma]

28. Schumer must be

angry with this outcome.

[turbinetree]

23. One Bill Clinton was brought before the House to be IMPEACHED

because he had consensual sex.
He was then brought before the senate to be tried and IMPEACHED, they did not have enough votes but they IMPEACHED him

House

"Upon the passage of H. Res. 611, Clinton was impeached on December 19, 1998, by the House of Representatives on grounds of perjury to a grand jury (by a 228–206 vote) and obstruction of justice (by a 221–212 vote). ... Clinton thus became the second U.S. president to be impeached, following Andrew Johnson in 1868."

Senate

"On February 12, the Senate emerged from its closed deliberations and voted on the articles of impeachment. A two-thirds majority, 67 votes, would have been necessary to convict and remove the President from office. The perjury charge was defeated with 45 votes for conviction and 55 against."

By the former f***ing Baylor president Ken Starr, that holier than thou hypocrite that was covering up the s**t going on down in Baylor, f***ing Texas


The dumpster on the other small hand is breaking every f***ing that and is in the book and he is breaking every ACT that has and was and has been passed and he has broken the oath that he f***ing swore to uphold, tell me exactly what again.

You have 52 f***ing senators that whine and gripe that he is saying bizarre sh** and he is leading by a f***ing twitter account and being "handled by an actor state called f***ing Russia>

He, the f***ing idiot that likes to roam around in the big old white house in the dark, like Fred Flintstone and signed off on a raid that got a navy seal killed because his war monger cabinet did exactly do what, play war monger games--------------said go for it, when Obama said lets f***ing think about this shall we

And then we have this "normalization" of a megalomaniac and fascist republican senate, that talks out of both sides of there mouth---------------what am I am missing here---------------------☠ the dream police here lets play the song;

[cstanleytech]

32. He wasnt impeached for having sex rather for lying under oath.

Was it a bullshit hypocritical move on the Repugnants part? Yes, it was but that doesnt change the fact they didnt try to oust him for simply having sex with another adult.

[aggiesal]

37. The House Impeaches ...

The trial is held in the Senate where the impeached
is either convicted or not convicted.
In Bill Clinton's case he was impeached by the House but not convicted in the Senate.

Impeachment by the House is similar to getting an indictment from the Grand Jury.

Once an indictment is issued, now you have to prove your case.
The Republicans couldn't prove their case.

[aggiesal]

35. They must have something on Pelosi! ...

I believe GW McIdiots administration, bugged all the democratic
leadership (wouldn't put it past Darth Cheney) and acquired dirt
on everyone, to be able to pull off the crime of the century.

Now Cheetolini is using this info to keep impeachment off the table.

[cstanleytech]

41. I think its simply more along the lines of Pelosi knows that right now it would take something major

to get the Repugnants to move to impeach him and so far nothing he has done has been severe enough to force their hand and with them in control of Congress the Dems would be wasting alot of time they could be doing other things like rebuilding their base.

[pnwmom]

46. No she's just more practical than many DUers. There is no point

to starting an impeachment that cannot lead to conviction. If you lose, you lose your credibility and your target ends up being even stronger -- like Bill Clinton after his impeachment.

[mdbl]

36. Nancy, just go away now.

So tired of her trying to make sense of repuglicans.

[Initech]

40. And this is exactly why we get called out for being spineless and out of touch.

We need to start fighting back against these assholes and right now we have no opposition. They're going to get everything they want and it's already started.

[pnwmom]

45. mdbl, an impeachment won't do any good unless it's followed by CONVICTION.

That would require a 2/3 vote in the Senate.

And we don't even have enough votes for a majority in the House.

[pnwmom]

44. Impeachment won't help unless there's a CONVICTION.

For that we'd need a 2/3 vote in the Senate.

Being impeached but not convicted made Bill Clinton more popular, not less.

Is there a point to risking that with DT?