Yes, by committee chairs (in particular, the Judicial Committee), but that’s Nadler. If the House starts impeachment, he’s going to time it for maximum impact.
Bypasses the arguments that have been used by Trump’s lawyers so far to challenge subpoenas. Legislative Purpose? Check. Right to privacy? Nope. The big one is Executive Privilege. Impeachment cuts through that like a hot knife through fatberg.
Yet she and Hoyer are perfectly willing to pass tons of Democratic policies out of the House knowing full well that the Senate will just vote them down. She knows well enough that the Dems can message on that, but refuses to make the same association with impeachment. The reason so many are infuriated with her right now is that she’s not saying “we’re keeping all options open”, she’s saying “yes, the president is violating the constitution and is almost certainly guilty of a number of crimes, but we’re not going to impeach him, we really just want to talk about infrastructure”. That’s a big difference. Meanwhile Nadler and half of the Judiciary Committee are seemingly crawling up the wall trying to get a hearing going, and more House Dems are publicly defecting from the “no impeachment” message by the day.
Honestly, opening an impeachment inquiry is the only way to break through the conservative media bubble where everything is rainbows and lolipops, because this is the kind of stuff happening out in the real world:
Thanks to Barr, Fox News and company can probably spin this report until the cows come home without anyone who watches them knowing any better, but if the House is actually running an impeachment inquiry they’re going to have to report on that. It’s going to be a lot harder to cover up the breadth and depth of Trump’s criminal activity when it’s live on C-SPAN than when it’s buried in a several-hundred-page report couched in “I’m not saying, I’m just saying…” language that none of the faithful are going to read.
Speaking of Pelosi and impeachment, I’ve been thinking more and more lately about how much of … this [gestures wildly] is a direct result of her and her fellow Democrats definitively refusing to impeach W Bush in 2006 for having plainly and openly lied the nation into a war with Iraq based on fabricated evidence. Nobody was held accountable for anything, and I think that just taught Republicans that they’re perfectly within their rights to go even further the next time. So they did.
Agreed. And the longer the Dems dither, the more it appears to independents and Trump-cultists alike that there must really be no there there.
Impeachment may indeed further the cracks now beginning to appear in even that heretofore impregnable dam of propaganda…
Fox Business is not the propaganda arm, btw. Fox News is.
One Fox News starts saying these things, we can safely say there’s cracks forming.
How’s this work for ya’?
Doesn’t quite have the punch of the Fox Business segment, but it’s something!
Cracks have been forming for a while now. Again, only cracks.
Do they help you see what you want to see?
Perhaps I can help lay it our for you:
You’re not taking crazy pills. At least here, there’s a modicum of logical consistency. In Faux News land, somehow Mueller found nothing, yet is also a traitor for investigating Trump, who did nothing wrong, but Mueller’s report is ruining his Presidency, which is going great!..
I wasn’t aware of that. Do you have a quote or link?
I might also add that if the Mueller team found enough evidence for obstruction, it really begs the question: why go to such lengths to obstruct justice if you are innocent of conspiracy in the first place?
My brain took a few seconds to figure out that “David Allen Green” is not “David Alan Grier”.
Nixon was Incredibly popular Before the Watergate investigations.
AFTER the investigations his popularity sank like a stone.
trump Never was popular. He will never get more people supporting him.
An investigation will get the non-voters to wake up and vote him (and the rest of the “Good Germans” out).
trump is such an idiot he doesn’t even realize what he just wrote.
Not so much, unfortunately. I was looking at a timeline of Nixon’s approval numbers recently. The Democrats initially proposed resolutions to impeach Nixon in '72, when his approval rating was ~60, and July '73, when it had dropped into the 40s, but they went nowhere. But by late October, after the “Saturday Night Massacre,” Nixon’s popularity had continued to plummet down into the low 30s. It was only then that impeachment resolutions, impeachment investigations and special prosecutor got started (and snowballed quite quickly). Nixon’s approval rating didn’t drop down too much after that point - never below about 25%.
Trump on the other hand, doesn’t seem to get below 40-something percent (depending on which survey one looks at) approval for long. (I find it inexplicable that his approval isn’t constantly dropping - but apparently so long as the economy doesn’t crater, white people are mostly fine with Trump.) The ceiling for Trump’s approval isn’t that high, it’s true, but, barring some economic catastrophe, the floor of his approval seems fairly set as well. The Fox News effect keeps his core support much bigger than Nixon’s was. Of course, Trump’s economic policies are damaging the economy, starting with his supporters, so we might see his support drop more.
I’d like to think that once Democrats start with impeachment investigations, what’s revealed will cause Trump to lose popularity. Either way, I think they should do it just because it’s the right thing to do, though.
I’d rather have trump busy with House and Senate investigations until the 2020 election.
After that we can arrest him and put him in jail
with mike pence waiting in the wings there’s a little more to it than that.
he knows how to use strategic silence if only we as a society knew how to use trategic logic . . .
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
