Technically doesn't matter what Mitch thinks, though knowing there is a zero percent chance the Senate votes to actually remove Trump plays a strong rules in not moving forward with impeachment in the house. Personally I believe he should be impeached.
"Democrats Draw Closer to a Dicey Question: Whether to Impeach Trump": . . . Ms. Pelosi and her allies also run risks in not moving toward impeachment. Voices on the Democrats’ left flank appear to have been emboldened by Mr. Mueller’s report, and will remind party leaders that letting Mr. Trump entirely off the hook for behavior they believe threatens the separation of powers sets a dangerous precedent for the country. Representative Maxine Waters, Democrat of California and the leader of the Financial Services Committee, broke with party leaders on Thursday, saying Congress would be abdicating its responsibility if it does not attempt to remove Mr. Trump. “At this point, Congress’s failure to impeach is complacency in the face of the erosion of our democracy and constitutional norms,” Ms. Waters said. “Congress’s failure to impeach would set a dangerous precedent and imperil the nation as it would vest too much power in the executive branch and embolden future officeholders to further debase the U.S. presidency, if that’s even possible.” Other Democrats did their best to avoid any judgments on impeachment on Thursday and instead focused their attention on the actions of Attorney General William P. Barr and an immediate fight over access to Mr. Mueller’s full findings. At least one chairman, whose committee would lead any impeachment proceedings, pointedly refused to say whether he viewed the actions laid out by Mr. Mueller as worthy of opening such an inquiry, though he did not foreclose the possibility. “It is too early to talk about that,” Representative Jerrold Nadler, Democrat of New York and the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, told reporters. “We will have to go follow the evidence where it leads. And I don’t know exactly where it will lead.” https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/18/us/politics/impeaching-trump.html
History will not be kind to Democrats for not impeaching. When you hold this report up against the Starr report on Clinton and the Jaworkski report on Nixon, it actually looks like the worst of the three. Especially when you add in the hush money payments, the tax crimes, and anyone else that comes out of the TEN+ investigations currently farmed out by Mueller. Still.... as a Democrat voter myself and a Beto donor, I certainly don’t want to impeach. I’ll admit that. The vote in the Senate will give Trump everything he wants in his narrative of being the victim. Still... important to note that following the Clinton impeachment, the Republicans won the next election. It didn’t hurt them with voters one bit.
Riffing off the posts above... much different than what the Mueller found with trump? The concluding statement in that article: "Wherefore Richard M. Nixon, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office."
The House Democrats had the votes to impeach Trump the first day of this Congressional term. 90+% of the damning stuff in the MR was public knowledge then, so Nancy would not have to twist that many arms to win the vote. Nancy will wait until the MR gets evaluated and Mueller himself has his say in public (and in private) hearings to decide the impeachment question. This is all good politics from Nancy, no surprise. Nancy will give the MR the due diligence it deserves. The key MR findings will be discussed ad nauseum in hearings by both sides. Video clips, both good and bad for Trump, will be made from Mueller's pronouncements in the public hearings. Afterward the hearings, public sentiment will either force or not force Mitch into backing impeachment and removal. There is a 99% chance that Mitch will not back impeachment, even if that means that the Repubs lose the Senate, House and WH in 2020. Even if the House impeaches Trump, Mitch could schedule the trial to start after the 2020 election or never (the Mitch Garland play). What would be the next move if any for Nancy then? Doing nothing might be the best political move, since serious political damage will have already been done. As an alternative, Nancy could have censure votes (essentially a toothless reprimand) for each "chargeable" offense in the MR, which has at least 10 OoJ charges. Each censure vote will drive the nail in Trump's coffin a little deeper. House Repubs facing serious Dem challengers will be forced to take a tough vote. The will of the Congress will be publicly noted. History will be less unkind. The only caveat is that the censure votes need to be safely done by the first primary.
Now this I agree with. Barr has disgraced the justice department and HAS TO be held accountable. Sanders ... whatever. As long as she’s heading their press efforts, the White House is just choosing to let Trumps twitter be their one and only official White House press reporting Avenue. That’s on them. The AG however... works for everyone in this country. He has to be held accountable and ultimately should be replaced.
I think Dems should target Trump’s people with impeachment/removal starting with this guy. Trump will be too hard to remove, just continue kicking his legs out from under him by going after his people.
This is laughable. No collusion or any of this fantasy Russian nonsense which was a hoax. Now trying to say he nefariously tried to obstruct something he wasn't guilty of with a few comments and tweets. This has really turned out to be one of the greatest hoaxes in political history. A guy is voted in by the people and is dragged through some conspiracy for half is presidency that turns out to be completely made up. Wonderful! I hope he continues to shrink government as this cesspool of bureaucrats needs to go.
It also sends the message about accountability in government as well. Nobody that goes to work in government that wants a career after 2 to 4 years in a White House wants "was Impeached for X,Y,Z reasons" on their resume. Completely different for a president although not a glowing endorsement by historical standards when the revisions show WHY they were impeached. Think about Barr's son who is now working in the White House. Barr might be finished after this final tour of duty to the GOP, but his son isn't. He'll now be known as the lawyer son of the AG who was impeached. For an AG, that's a pretty damning thing to have on Barr's resume & legacy. Eric Holder can't even get over the fact that he was held in contempt. Being impeached is something else entirely. I think the position of AG is one that has largely been governed by the "honor system" and has been overlooked for real accountability given the nature of being the head of the criminal justice system, and being a traditional white house political appointee. The Senate hearing process is not enough.
Interesting, because I think history would also not be kind to Democrats for impeaching. It would help with their most left leaning base, I think move more of those in the middle to the right, and make those on the right stronger supporters of Trump. Net effect...loss for the Dems. Which is why I actually kind of hope they do go forward with it. The other reason being if they do that, they won't be focusing on their agenda, most of which I am strongly against. So, impeachment is a double win. So, by all means, please proceed. If by this you mean history will say the Democrats didn't act when they should....there are all sorts of things they didn't act on when they should (likewise on the right), and history mostly doesn't seem to give a crap. I think 'history' recognizes that everything politicians do is mostly political, and therefore not of any real consequence.
In "Politics or Principle: Congress Must Decide," Joe Walsh argues "If Congress takes the easy way out, it will give license to future presidents": The Democrats will feel great political pressure to avoid impeachment, fearing that impeachment proceedings will hurt the party politically in 2020. That shouldn’t matter. The Mueller report paints a very damning portrait of this president. It paints a picture of someone who knew Russia was interfering, invited that interference, and then did everything in his power to stop the investigation into that interference. As difficult as it might be politically to go down the impeachment road, to ignore the bad behavior laid out in this report would be to give license to future presidents to do the same. https://thebulwark.com/politics-or-principle-congress-must-decide/
Just step back for a second and realize who you are at this period in time (4-19-2019). You are a Trump supporter who obviously does not like Democrats, and a redacted 448 page report largely on presidential misconduct just came out yesterday. What you are not- You are not someone in 2035 who was not involved politically in 2019. You aren't reading about and learning about Trump, Clinton, and Nixon all at the same time in hindsight. I also don't know if you are someone (like with Nixon's voters/supporter who are older now) that will change your view when the times change & potentially your views change, or you learn more information to where you take a different stance on your support. So when I say "History will remember" ... I'm not talking about what a Trump supporter in April of 2019 will think because frankly I could care less what a Trump supporter in 2019 would think. History will also wonder WTF those people were thinking by continuing to support a bigoted liar who was a 2 bit wannabe autocrat who locked up children in cages. A Trump supporters opinion of things in April of 2019 isn't the sole arbiter of what the consensus historical context will be years from now.
Have you read it? He actually ordered the obstruction numerous times, his subordinates just never carried it out hoping he would forget. Is that what we excuse these days?
What is responsible about starting impeachment what does the country gain by impeachment? Even if he is impeached he will still be president until he is voted out of office.
This is truly bizzaro world, supporters of Trump actually are actually advocating for impeachment to prop up Trump anyway they can.
If impeachment is the correct thing do, then it should be done. The fact that the Senate won't remove Trump will fall on their shoulders. I understand that many think there will be a political price to pay for impeaching. There may be. Impeaching Clinton didn't harm his popularity. It may have even increased. Yet, the next election was won by the Republicans. So how much of a price will there really be?
They should do what's right and worry about politics later. Fact is that Trump is a threat to this country
