Pelosi: 'If the goods are there, you must impeach'

Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2019/06/19/pelosi-if-the-goods-are-the.html

But not yet.

5 Likes

Well, the Mueller report has detailed several instances of obstruction of justice. The Don McGahn part of the report is plenty to hang him on. Has Pelosi even read the report?

14 Likes

The goods are there, Nancy. Time to replace “if” with “when”.

19 Likes

could we come up with something snappier? “When Meuller preach, you must impeach?”

8 Likes

My hope, and this is really a hope in the absence of any evidence, is that the democrats are actually trying to be cunning and want to time the impeachment hearings closer to the election so that each piece of dirt they drop ties into their electioneering. And it’s not just about Trump, it’s about mopping up every scumbag Republican in office. They’re all in the same dirty pool together, and any impeachment proceeding is going to catch extra Republicans in its process.

It could work, though it’s probably a high risk strategy. Regardless, it involves doing something, so the Democrats certainly won’t do it.

20 Likes

Yeah, well, the goods are there. Time to get on with it.

6 Likes

She needs to endorse Warren as well. Now.

2 Likes

That’s an obvious strategy for the Dems, and thus the one I assume they’re pursuing, instead of pandering to all the “Impeach Trump NOW!!1!” people, who apparently prefer a loud and well-publicized defeat in the Senate to continuously harassing Trump and the GOP in the hopes of sabotaging their election chances with maximal efficiency.

Seriously people, don’t fall prey to the “silver bullet” thinking, or yearning for the quick and emotionally satisfying action at the cost of effectiveness.

4 Likes

I think this is almost certainly what’s going on. It’s one huge timing gamble.

I’ve read (somewhere) that prior impeachments have taken between 3 and 10 months, not sure if this was just the house or both the house and senate.

Let’s be cynical, and game out, if the house takes 8 months to investigate and hold hearings before sending to the senate, and that the senate does it’s entire part in 1 month.

At the end of this 9 months there’s really only 2 options:

  1. He’s not found guilty in the senate.
  2. He’s found guilty in the senate.

If it’s option 1, and it’s done prior to the election, that’s months of campaigning on “totally cleared by the senate”.

Today, option 1 is likely.

For it to be option 2, there has to be so much found that it tips over enough of the republican senators or enough of them are tangled up in the issues to also be removed. Today, it doesn’t feel like anything will ever tip them over. Hence it will not be option 2.

That only leaves creating a third option. Investigate as much as possible prior to starting the formal process. Drag out the house timeline so that it doesn’t finish early enough for the senate to wrap up before the election. Deny the ability to campaign on “totally cleared by the senate” by not allowing the senate enough time to clear. It’s a timing hedge, while at the same time developing enough information to try and force the republican tipping if possible.

This kind of slow deliberate timeline doesn’t play well to the sidelines. It’s going to be a long year…

14 Likes

Pelosi’s strategy is sound [leave Dotard to hang himself], but the time for action is upon us.

8 Likes

The goods don’t just magically appear - they’ll never get there if you don’t open an impeachment inquiry, Nan.

17 Likes

Sounds a bit too much like “If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit.

Not that Trump’s crimes don’t fit him like a glove.

Currently a large portion of the country believes that he Mueller report completely exonerates Trump. Doing nothing perpetuates this belief. Other than a loud, public impeachment hearing, I don’t see anything that will get the attention of Trump supporters enough for them to even hear what was in the report.

Not trying to impeach because Trump will claim vindication if they do and it fails in the Senate seems like an absurd argument. What the hell do you think he’ll claim if they don’t even try?

11 Likes

If it’s option 1, which would be preceded by months of hearings widely exposing Trump’s many crimes, misdemeanors, and lawless behavior, that’s months of campaigning where the Republican members of the Senate get to be harangued by reporters and constituents demanding to know why those many documented crimes are acceptable behavior. This sort of learned helplessness where Republicans get to get away with unending amounts of terrible behavior because Dems are afraid of pointing it out for fear of losing for doing so is infuriating.

Go on the offensive. It works. Stop letting the bully set the terms of engagement before the engagement even starts.

Especially since while Pelosi sits on her thumbs and spins, Trump is pushing us closer and closer to another disastrous war in the Middle East, and his goon squad ICE is promising to round up 11 million people and stuff them into totally-not-concentration camps. Dithering is not a consequence-free course of action!

15 Likes

No matter what happens…may he hopefully drop dead his last day in office. The world does not deserve to continue to have to put up with this disgusting boot scraping.

6 Likes

They can do all of those things now. They’ve already started. All without setting the impeachment process in motion. All to make that process better when it does start.

I agree that they need to increase what they’re doing already now. But, simply changing from “house committee investigates X” to “house impeachment committee investigates x” doesn’t solve anything.

They need to figure out how to actually enforce subpoenas, how to cover more information, larger scope, more findings, better communication. If they can’t solve these fundamental issues, ratcheting up the stakes by calling it impeachment is a losing proposition.

They need to solve all those issues, provide actual oversight, and shine a light on all the corrupt shit going on.

3 Likes

There is absolutely no republican crime egregious enough for mitch mc’connell to even get upset about let alone take any action. mc’connell will gleefully destroy America to maintain control.

3 Likes

I’ve seen multiple people discussing this issue on Twitter point out that actually kicking off an impeachment hearing would give more weight and force to their subpoenas, and broaden their authority to request information. Of course, that would also mean actually playing hardball, not dancing around civil contempt votes for two weeks while the AG has a good laugh with the Speaker of the House about getting put in the Congressional lock-up. Charge these assholes with inherent contempt, fine them, put them in prison. Make it hurt to refuse to comply with the law. These aren’t impossible quandaries to wrestle with, it’s just Dems refusing to actually do their fucking jobs because they’re so petrified of maybe making someone angry at them. It’s cowardice, nothing more.

Impeachment hearings also don’t have a fixed duration, so it’s not like they’re putting it off because of some fear that they’ll run out of time to impeach once they get started. Pelosi is just deathly afraid of the i-word. She’s done this song and dance before with W, whom she swore not to impeach if the Dems retook Congress in 2006 despite it being blatantly obvious by then that he’d lied about basically everything in the run-up to the Iraq war. Accountability is for suckers. And Democrats, I guess, but then I repeat myself.

11 Likes

So tired of Pelosi, a sack of donor money in a bad outfit, who refuses to do the moral thing because she doesn’t want to imperil her and Chuck Schumer’s jobs, paychecks and lifestyles. This ins’t about timing – the danger is now. This isn’t about political tactics – someone has obstructed justice. And the longer you wait, the more calculated and partisan you look.

Nancy Pelosi needs to lose any election she ever runs for again, based solely on her dereliction of duty in the name of ‘superior optics’ and trying to be sure that people who already hate her won’t hate her more, which they never will. She’s exactly the kind of ‘Liberal’ Frank writes about in Listen, Liberal – someone who promises a more equal kind of inequality, with artisanal organic hand-made chains for wage-slaves to serve her corporate masters.

Impeachy.