39 Comments - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 1:27 pm: Seeing Lipinski and Bustos as the holdouts, and looking at their districts, and seeing Bustos as the DCCC chair, and Lipper’s kid as that south side conservative Dem that seems to be fading or fully disappearing… … maybe the question is why did it “take so long” to whittle down to these last two? Maybe it’s because the goal is to defeat POTUS, and if you can’t remove POTUS, why gin up the POTUS bass? If the Dems “mess” this up (and mess is a substitution for another word) and decide they need to feel better about themselves, impeach, fail in the Senate, and then see POTUS take the oath again, how will they feel that day? At this point, the gamble is real. The goal is clear. “Why take a chance” - Stark - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 1:31 pm: Just when you think Lipinski can’t possibly continue to outdo himself, he continues to prove one wrong. “As a Democrat, if we move to impeach, we won’t get the *checks notes* Republicans to vote for us.” - Shorter Lipinski, how inspiring. - Donnie Elgin - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 1:37 pm: ” I think the best way to remove President Trump from office is voting him out in the 2020: Lipinski is the realist, the rest of the IL delegation are offing lip service to placate the most vocal constituents/donors. The impeachment boat sailed long ago yet now they come out in droves to support. - OutOfState - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 1:39 pm: ===why gin up the POTUS bass=== 1) To fulfill their constitutional obligation to provide oversight to the executive branch 2) To highlight in the media the evidence they have found that the man running for re-election to the highest office in the land has committed serious crimes directly related to his prior election to the office 3) To procure additional evidence of wrongdoing that will help in defeating POTUS in Nov. 202 - JT11505 - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 1:42 pm: For Dems, winning the Senate is everything, and impeachment now is a distraction. If they have the Senate, even if Trump wins they can use the even more real threat of impeachment to bully him into all kinds of things. - Grandson of Man - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 1:43 pm: “I have been and continue to be in support of the investigative work that is being done in the House committees.” It reminds of the marijuana legalization “go slow” crowd: We need more time to study the issue. “it could backfire because the president would be able to say that he was persecuted by the Democratic House but exonerated by the Senate” Not good. Democrats need to stop letting their opponents set narratives for them. Don’t worry about what Trump says. Trump allegedly obstructed justice, and to top it off, he is unfit for office and desecrates it daily. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 1:50 pm: ===To fulfill their constitutional obligation to provide oversight to the executive branch=== Is there 67 open-minded Senators that *could* convict? Yeah, that whole “doing their duty” fails miserably when the jury won’t. ===To highlight in the media the evidence they have found that the man running for re-election to the highest office in the land has committed serious crimes directly related to his prior election to the office=== Yeah… to all that… if you think folks aren’t “aware”, globally, and you *need* this to do that, you must’ve missed the whole Mueller fiasco, lol. “No we need to show…” Yeah, that ain’t helping. It only gins up POTUS sympathizers and Trumpkins all in to defeat the “constant noise of Democrat investigations” ===To procure additional evidence of wrongdoing that will help in defeating POTUS in Nov. 2020=== If you think even *more* evidence is gonna change that 35-42% Trumpkins have, or take away a Red State… yikes. Impeachment isn’t going to move the electoral needle to help, it’s gonna hurt the way to defeat this POTUS. Show me 67 Senators willing (not even ready, but willing) to impeach… then you have my attention. - Stark - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 1:53 pm: I get the argument about the Senate votes not being there, but I like how Rep. Porter (D-CA) put it: “If the only times I got out of bed were days I thought something I vote on would pass the Senate, I would have bedsores.” - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 1:56 pm: ===I get the argument about the Senate votes not being there, but I like how Rep. Porter (D-CA) put it: “If the only times I got out of bed were days I thought something I vote on would pass the Senate, I would have bedsores.”=== Having the Senate exonerate POTUS… because there’s this need to “do our duty”, then have it backfire… in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona, and Florida… … will ya feel better that ya helped by this impeachment maneuver? The goal is 2021. Will this POTUS be taking the oath, or will his defeat happen? - Jibba - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 2:02 pm: ===To fulfill their constitutional obligation to provide oversight to the executive branch=== And even without a specific impeachment inquiry, they can continue all investigations that uncover the same information between now and the election. If they come up with actual crimes that the public would understand, they could begin even without a Senate majority to convict. Contrarywise, the Republicans would have impeached Obama just to prove he was illegitimate if they had even a fraction of the evidence currently available against Trump, so OOS and GOM have a point. At some point you just have to do it and darn the consequences. - hisgirlfriday - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 2:05 pm: Conservadems like Lipinski and Bustos need to realize that all voters like their government to avoid corruption and abuse of power. The Dem leadership that is too lazy or worn out to even try making the case for impeachment should retire and turn over the party to the next generation. It’s probably futile in terms of removal from office but so what? None of the bills that the House proposed, debated, or passed will get through Mitch either yet Nancy still called those bills for votes. Because it was their duty as House members to still do the work. Trump will manufacture outrage and claim persecution to try to gin up his base no matter what House Dems do. They might as well do the right thing under the Constitution. And as a side effect, more Dems will be mobilized to volunteer and donate after actually seeing Dems do something. - Stark - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 2:07 pm: The backfiring of an impeachment proceeding two decades ago (where I assume the hesitance from Dem leadership is coming from) is not a fair indicator of the feasibility of said action in the current political environment. Backfiring is just as much an assumption as the process working to the Democrats favor as I see it. Also, there’s the entire question of whether or not we’re going to allow the president to flagrantly violate the law, which is pretty apparent absent the political calculus in this case. By default one is arguing that it’s fine for the president to break the law because something something the politics may potentially not go our way. Profiles in courage indeed. - West Side the Best Side - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 2:17 pm: Trump is (in so many ways) not a normal president. As long as Moscow Mitch controls the Senate everyone in their right mind knows what the result of an impeachment vote would be. Whatever the House brings out it is not going to change the minds of two groups of voters: The people who knew from the get go that he is nothing but a snake oil salesman, and the people who, no matter what is revealed, will still think he walks on water. The difference in 2020 will be voters in between. Trump as a martyr, which is the way his campaign will pitch it, will really not help get the in betweeners who will be the deciding electoral votes. Lipinski is correct on this one. - PJ - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 2:23 pm: ==Lipinski is the realist== What a crock. Impeachment is appears in the constitution - it’s not a “may” provision. It’s outlined as one of the duties of Congress to impeach if the qualifications are met. If they aren’t being met right now, there is literally no standard. We may as well just strike it from the constitution. They have a duty to press forward with it, regardless of their cynical political judgments about how likely it is to succeed. Just yesterday the headline NYT story was Trump promising pardons to anyone in his administration who breaks law in the seizure of private land during his sprint to build something he can call a wall before the election. This is beyond a joke. Holding out at this point is mere cowardice. - SSL - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 2:25 pm: Why give former Trump supporters that are undecided on a second term any reason to re engage? Dems can’t win the impeachment battle and may lose the war. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 2:29 pm: ===They have a duty to press forward with it, regardless of their cynical political judgments about how likely it is to succeed.=== If you are willing to gamble on 14 months versus 4+ years of this POTUS on a constitutional duty… which is more damaging to the country? - Jocko - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 2:37 pm: The better question (to Bustos, Lipinski, & Pelosi) is what action would lead them to consider an impeachment inquiry? Donald giving Vladimir Putin the nuclear ‘football’? - Amalia - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 2:38 pm: Loyalty to Nancy Pelosi. that is important for both of these holdouts. - Pick a Name - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 3:03 pm: Dems failed miserably with the Kavanaugh hearing and failed even more miserably on the Russian collusion hoax. Time to just go and do the job you are being paid to do. - Steve Polite - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 3:06 pm: The real reason for impeachment https://youtu.be/7FpTrkSN-xc - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 3:07 pm: - Pick a Name - Do you think “Barry” was born in Kenya? I’m curious. I know you’re a Trumpkin. - Donnie Elgin - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 3:30 pm: “They have a duty to press forward with it, regardless of their cynical political judgments about how likely it is to succeed” Absent partisan political lenses there is no duty to impeach. The dearth of GOP voices (Amash is an obvious outlier) finding a need to inquire about Trumps potential high Crimes/Misdemeanors illustrates that what we have is one party expressing hate for the president. Using this standard every president should be subject to impeachment by the hands of the virtuous constitution loving members of the opposition. - DD - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 3:31 pm: OW, and we know you are a faux republican, your point? I’m still waiting on any evidence that trump did anything wrong other than hurt your feels. - SWIL_Voter - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 3:37 pm: I’ll never understand the people who look at impeachment solely through political lenses. If crimes are only crimes if the opposition party has a Supermajority in the Senate, then we don’t live under the form of government I was promised. Republicans won the election that followed Clinton’s impeachment, and if we used the same political calculation in the 70s, Nixon never would have resigned. I’m just not sure what you’ve won even if “impeachment by voting him out” ends up working out. Every president from then on will just ignore all the laws. Why wouldn’t they? If Dems choose not to impeach, that’s on them. If Dems impeach and Rs refuse to convince, that’s on them. They should all be on record and held accountable. Enough with the weasel words - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 3:38 pm: ===and we know you are a faux republican, your point?=== I’m not a Raunerite or a Trumpkin. I don’t hate union folks, or SSM, I’m not a supporter of the Eastern Bloc 51st state, and I’m definitely not an apologist or a supporter of white nationalists in the GOP. If that’s you… ===I’m still waiting on any evidence that trump did anything wrong other than hurt your feels.=== My point is quite simple. Trumpkins love a good conspiracy, especially false conspiracies revolving around race. Trump, a proven liar in and out of office is a martyr to all things, even the lies he tells. I’m with GHWB, with Kasich, and Republicans that knew or know… Trump isn’t a Republican, but the corruptor of the GOP that now embraces white nationalists, courts hate, and supports Putin more than our own allies. I cite Trump’s tweets. With all that, impeachment is a terrible mistake. Remove Trump in 2020 - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 4:13 pm: ===if we used the same political calculation in the 70s, Nixon never would have resigned.=== If Nixon had cable news and Fox News specifically, why would Nixon resign? Sometimes “the times” dictate the moves. A constitutional law class I took looked at impeachment and one day the class discussion was this; “Constitutionally, impeachment is a tool the legislature can use, in our case Congress. If it is a foregone conclusion that the necessary votes for conviction and removal are lacking, is proceeding to trial still a reasonable decision?” I’ve been thinking about that day a lot, also because it is as one of the 3 times that whole class things spilled into “another day” of discussion. This was well before Trump, well after Nixon. The bottom line in this class is was; Knowing the outcome solely mattered to the politics of the day and the thoughts of it after. Choosing to go forward or not, with the outcome in the Senate but decided, is a political one, and not one to be taken with idealist grandeur. Nixon, like Rod… see… the Senates in both were, you guessed it… ready to convict, and in Rod’s case… convicted overwhelmingly, bipartisanly, and without dissent. The reasonable, the outcome, is removal. Without any chance, the gamble then becomes a political one. - Last Bull Moose - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 4:33 pm: I think they should start impeachment hearings. But only impeach if they have the votes in the Senate. Trump has been fighting disclosures at every step. Once formal impeachment hearings start, I think the courts will force disclosure. There is a good chance that information will surface that will swing the Senate vote. Nixon resigned when he was told by Republicans that the Senate would convict. - ArchPundit - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 5:06 pm: ===Absent partisan political lenses there is no duty to impeach. The dearth of GOP voices (Amash is an obvious outlier) finding a need to inquire about Trumps potential high Crimes/Misdemeanors illustrates that what we have is one party expressing hate for the president. Using this standard every president should be subject to impeachment by the hands of the virtuous constitution loving members of the opposition. Before an impeachment inquiry started during Watergate the conditions were the same with no prominent Republicans supporting impeachment inquiries. I’m with Last Bull Moose in starting hearings and move to impeach depending on how the hearings go. An inquiry doesn’t necessarily lead to impeachment by the House. However, on foreign emoluments alone there is a clear case for impeachment. The President is taking things of value from foreign governments without Congressional approval. That’s impeachable right there and there is no historical precedent for what he is doing. Jimmy Carter had to sell his peanut farm under pressure from Congress despite no evidence of foreign or domestic emoluments. - Lucky Pierre - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 5:08 pm: Trump isn’t a Republican, but the corruptor of the GOP that now embraces white nationalists, courts hate, and supports Putin more than our own allies. No surprise you are dead wrong about Republican approval- it is very strong for Trump’s policies. “A Monmouth University poll released Thursday found 84 percent of Republicans approve of Trump’s job performance, while an AP-NORC poll found that 79 percent do. His highest recent approval mark among fellow Republicans was 88 percent in a Fox News poll of registered voters earlier this month.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-claims-higher-job-approval-among-republicans-than-recent-polls-have-found/ - RuralJewel - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 5:11 pm: I think at this point Dems need to focus on defeating their opponent in the 2020 election. Impeachment proceedings would only rally the President’s base. I sincerely doubt the success of impeachment charges at this point. There is a big difference between being cowardly and playing the long game. If Trump is voted out there is little stopping criminal charges at that point, for conduct before he took the oath and after. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 5:24 pm: I wrote… ===Trump isn’t a Republican, but the corruptor of the GOP that now embraces white nationalists, courts hate, and supports Putin more than our own allies.=== Read… - Lucky Pierre - Really read… ===that now embraces white nationalists, courts hate, and supports Putin more than our own allies.=== That *is* Trump’s GOP. The party devolved to that. Of course, as the percentage goes up with self-identified GOPers of Trump, Trumpkins lost the US House. It’s like you don’t read… and that’s ok. I’m glad you embrace the Trump GOP… and white supremest in the party. Good to know. Thanks. - West Side the Best Side - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 5:57 pm: Wish I had the faith some others do that the House could start their impeachment inquiry and then count the Senate votes before going ahead, but just don’t see that as a realistic scenario. Once they start it will be a runaway train and that will only lead to the martyrdom of the chosen one. If he loses in 2020 indict him, if he wins then move ahead with impeachment since we all know he will only get worse. - Pick a Name - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 9:41 pm: No Willy, I don’t think the guy previously known as Barry Sorrento was born in Kenya - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 9:49 pm: - Pick a Name - President Obama was born in America and you support a man who still isn’t convinced his predecessor is an American. Think on that. All the conspiracies that this POTUS believes. You think windmills cause cancer? Think Putin is more honorable than any of our allies? It’s not that I don’t want impeachment, I don’t want another four years of crazy. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 10:20 pm: - RNUG - Here’s what I read; ===he is a US citizen=== The rest, that’s your take, that’s your feel… … and you’re not stating in any way he is NOT an American. Your rationale is quite different than those “he’s not an American and here’s why… “ You want to clinically look at that, but rationally and honestly say, unequivocally he’s an American and rightfully eligible… … then that’s your take. - ArchPundit - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 10:58 pm: —-All I can say is the birth certificate I saw circulated was a delayed filing by the mother. He was born on the 4th and it was accepted by The State of Hawaii on the 8th. What are you talking about? - ArchPundit - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 11:01 pm: BTW, my birth certificate from Will County took six days to be accepted. - Graduated College Student - Wednesday, Aug 28, 19 @ 11:20 pm: 1. Trump’s going to fire up the base regardless. 2020 is going to be won or lost with the independents. An impeachment proceeding that airs out the rampant lawlessness of the Trump administration would probably help convince the independents to vote against Trump. 2. It bears repeating that the incumbent Presidential Party went on to lose the next presidential election after a serious impeachment attempt both times it happened in the modern era. - Practical Politics - Thursday, Aug 29, 19 @ 9:41 am: @Graduated College Student: You are counting Nixon’s resignation along with Clinton’s impeachment trial. Okay, but let’s agree that Nixon resigned before the impeachment process played out. It is a safe bet he would have been impeached eventually if had not stepped aside. As for the incumbent parties losing the next presidential elections (1976 and 2000) while you are correct, it is worth noting that in each election the final results were razor thin. I doubt 2020 is going to be a normal election year. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.