orald
4850
Nadler’s conducting of the Judiciary hearings has exceeded my expectations, minor stumbles aside.
Whether Mitch and Chuck can strike a deal on how to conduct the Senate hearings will be interesting. Neither of them seem to have compelling interests in having those hearings drag on. If the Dem senate candidates posed a stronger threat to Trump, Mitch might want to pin them down, but I think his calculus is to move on and get this over with.
Trump however wants a fiery circus. So we’ll know more soon.
I also wonder if Trump will insist that Collins or Jordan be the House Managers in the Senate trial.
If they’re going to lose anyway for voting in favor of any impeachment charges at all, what does it matter how many they vote for?
magnet
4853
A rep from an R+1 district is not guaranteed to lose, he is merely at a disadvantage. Anything he can do distinguish himself from other Democrats could improve his prospects.
And voting for more impeachment articles is largely a symbolic gesture, since Trump would be acquitted of 100 articles as readily as he would of 2. So this is not a politically useful moment for Pelosi to insist that Democrats fall in line.
He’s already a ‘no’ on any charges at all, so more charges cost nothing.
The entire exercise is a symbolic gesture, but Presidents can’t be permitted to obstruct justice seems just as important a symbol as that they can’t be permitted to extort for personal political gain.
One of the arguments the Republicans offer is that there is no crime for which the President is being impeached. Obstruction of justice is an actual crime, and having that on the list of charges robs them of credibly making that claim.
Edit: Trump will campaign on the claim that the Mueller report totally exonerated him. Why let him do that without highlighting the crimes Mueller documented? It’s…stupid. If they are crimes, you have to impeach. If you don’t impeach, then they weren’t crimes.
So this is all just a huge waste of everyone’s time? Lame.
I think that story is saying there will be a trial, rather than an immediate vote for dismissal.
They’re going to try to exonerate him. ROFL. And they all, to a man, know he’s guilty as hell.
Yes, but it’s an admission that McConnell doesn’t think he can get 51 votes to dismiss the charges outright.
I don’t believe that Dems who won in purple districts are necessarily going to lose as a result of this particular impeachment. They might, however, if the articles took a kitchen-sink approach. I know and you know that Trump obstructed justice, but the broad public perception among those who never discuss politics online in forums like these is that the Mueller thing is a dead horse. With these obvious, easy to understand charges of dirty pool, maybe we can save those purple Dem seats.
tl;dr: We’ll be double fucked if Trump somehow pulls out a victory in November AND we lose the House.
The suggestion was to have a third charge, obstruction of justice, based on the strongest example(s) of obstruction from the Mueller report. Not a kitchen sink, just three charges instead of two, and one of them an actual statutory crime.
Edit: I’m guessing there isn’t a single Dem who would lose his / her seat for voting for three charges but will retain his / her seat by voting for only two. The idea is absurd.
Because just like the republicans, they care more about themselves than this country.
I hope y’all get a chance to see what Hank Johnson just did to Matt Gaetz. It was glorious.
Personally, I like the two charges rather than the kitchen sink approach.
The Dem’s argument is that Trump’s attempt to steal a FUTURE election (and his cover-up attempts) are important enough to impeach right now, while charges and punishment all of his other, numerous, ridiculous crimes should be rendered after he is out of office… and it’s the voter’s job to make that happen when the Senate acquits.
On a more cynical note, explaining all the vagaries of the Mueller report and the meaning of “emoluments” to the country is a difficult task, especially with the GOP running around screaming about conspiracy theories. Never forget that half of the US voters have below-average intelligence.
OK, granted, “kitchen-sink” was hyperbole on my part. Still, any Articles based on the Mueller Report findings threaten to peel away Dem floor votes to impeach right now, beyond the two who voted against officially starting the inquiry in September, AND make purple district Dems more vulnerable.
Timex
4866
This is such an epic burn of Matt Gaetz.
Edit:
For those who missed it, this follows Matt Gaetz attacking Hunter Biden for his past issues with substance abuse, and which point the “pot calling the kettle black” comment came up, since Gaetz was picked up for a DUI, and got off because his daddy corruptly pulled some strings.
It’s true that some Dems might not want to vote for a third article, but I’m blaming them for that because it is stupid of them. Again, there is no right-leaning constituency in any vulnerable Democratic district that is going to say oh, well, he/she only voted for two articles of impeachment, so that’s all right then.
One charge is not a kitchen sink.
There’s nothing particularly complicated about the President first ordered his lawyer to fire the special prosecutor Mueller in order to stop the investigation (which is obstruction of justice), then ordered his lawyer to create a false record intended to hide the fact of this order (which is obstruction of justice), and these crimes were reported to us by the lawyer himself, who swore to them under oath.
Other people were talking about the “Kitchen Sink” appraoch above. It’s not all about YOU Scott!
Eh. Just my opinion, but I find that to be a little complex. Especially given that although some people say (testified to) that the POTUS ordered the action, it was never actually carried out. Then you’ve got to go into why, exactly the investigation was going on, what caused that, what happened when the investigation concluded, why Congress didn’t choose to impeach back THEN, etc., etc.
I find that when I want a result that depends on many people electing to act in one way, it’s best to keep things as simple as possible with few possibilities for distractions.
