The minute we impeach is the minute we lose ownership of the narrative.

[gulliver]

The Republican Senate would then take up the matter and turn it into the Mueller Report vs. the Steele Dossier, the FISA warrants, and the Strzok texts. The trial would be rushed and stage managed through the Senate by Senate Republicans and Republican Chief Justice John Roberts. It would be quickly decided in Trump's favor and would be Constitutionally over. We lose. Trump would be exonerated. The Republicans would make sure that the story ended on a high note for themselves and Trump. Any further investigation in the House would be cast as Dems not accepting a Constitutional verdict.

Time is on our side. The longer we hold the impeachment power, the more we can drag Trump and the Republicans through the dirt and build a stronger and stronger case. I definitely want to see more and more dirt on Trump, more and more cravenness from Republicans. We need to have the courage to fight for the Constitution against both Trump and the Republican Senate, using both our Constitutional powers and the democratic vote. That also means being brave enough to withstand our own impulses for instant gratification and the rationalizations that accompany them.

[qdouble]

1. Hogwash.

The minute we make everything about winning future elections, the minute I stop trusting in our government officials to act based on principles instead of politics. There is absolutely no guarantee that Trump is going to lose in 2020 if we don't impeach him. That he has committed several impeachable offenses is the most compelling narrative against him... if the Senate want to rubber stamp corruption, that should give the Democrats more support, not less.

[watoos]

6. If we don't impeach

Barr will control the narrative. I heard what he said, he plans to investigate the FBI and Democrats who carried out a witch hunt against Trump.

If we don’t impeach we never see the grand jury testimony.

[uponit7771]

22. +1, This needs to be an OP also ... very good point, we can be ... SURE ... Baghdad Barr will raise

... all the bogus investigations he can

[Cary]

34. Begin by impeaching Barr

String this along. Let them all commit to their support for the criminal. Make them campaign on a platform of "please don't impeach me."

We control the narrative.

[Calista241]

42. You have to prove Barr committed a crime to impeach him.

You can't just impeach someone for having a different opinion of a report. They'll have to do a LOT of digging, and come up with a good legal theory as to why they want to impeach Barr.

[Cary]

47. Where does it say he has to have committed a crime?

Impeachment is political, not criminal. Nevertheless distorting and lying about Mueller's report is certainly part of the obstruction.

That is a legal opinion from a duly licensed attorney with 34 years of practice.

[azureblue]

62. this isn't about Dems vs Repubs

It's about the law of the land, the constitution, and the values this country was founded upon, the people of America, vs. corrupt, lying, greedy, power at any cost, autocratic rich men who think this country is their piggy bank. Who happen to be Republicans.

[JohnZSmith]

77. Only corruption and cowardice are preventing impeachment of this proven corrupt traitor!

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/mueller-report-proves-trump-failed-sound-alarm-russia-impeachable-offense-ncna997076

[mountain grammy]

88. +1000

[Thekaspervote]

2. Great post! This is war, this battle is impeachment. loose this battle and we may loose the war

I trust our dem leaders to do the right thing

[NRaleighLiberal]

3. Loose wars and loose battles.

What a weird day here!

[defacto7]

11. I wonder if there's a vacine for it?

[DFW]

29. LOL!

EXCERPTS FROM THE OFFICIAL DICTIONARY OF REPUBLICANESE

In Republicanese, many words that sound alike may be spelled differently at random. A few prominent examples:

In Republicanese, the following words may be spelled at random using any of the three ways given:

A.) Two, Too, To
B.) Their, They're, There
c.) Your, Yore, You're

The Republicanese version of Robin Hood therefore starts with "In days of you're...."

The only rule is that the correct use of them as in English is never permitted twice in a row.

Words with single letters that change meaning when that letter is doubled must never be used in correct English context. The classic example is “lose” vs. “loose.” In Republicanese, if you do not win an election, then you “loose” that election. Conversely, if your (Republicanese: you’re) belt is too tight, you need it more “lose” in order to be comfortable. Another example would be the Republicanese, “I met Donald Trump, and he was rudder than I imagined,” vs. “I grabbed the ruder and was able to steer the boat to shore.”

In Republicanese, an apostrophe is used to form a plural, but it must be done at random, never systematically. For example, Bill and Hillary are "the Clinton's," but Bill, Chelsea and Hillary are "the Clintons." The other way around is also correct. In Republicanese, either form is correct as long as it is not spelled the same way twice in a row.

[defacto7]

44. Ha... what a great guide to Republican spelling and punctuation.

It's information will be helpful as long as its contents stays as convoluted as the minds from witch its drived.

[Eyeball_Kid]

76. "witch its drived"? This must be a joke. n/t

[DFW]

79. That's the whole idea!

Your onto us........

[uponit7771]

23. Clinton impeachment hurt democrats, Dems lost the house the senate & the presidency afterwards.

[azureblue]

63. and look at the lengths

the GOP went to impeach Clinton. Years of digging to come up with a BJ, when repubs had their mistresses. IOW, the Dems lost because the media sensationalized Monica and ignored Newt, etc.
And note that Starr released the entire report to the public........

[manor321]

4. LOL. The arguments against impeaching are so bad.

Impeachment is the only option.

[gulliver]

5. Hehe, not if we judge them by the lack of counterarguments.

[uponit7771]

24. +1 Rudy G: "It's OK for Trump to get help from Russia" that's one of the best arguments FOR impeach

... ment knowing Red Don and crew will be helped by the Russians in 2020.

[kozar]

7. How far down

Does our country need to be,,in the eyes of the world and the eyes within our own countrymen, before you have seen enough dirt and cravenness?

These 2 years of watching our country go downhill at breakneck speed isnt enough?

I guess I am just confused. I would relate this to knowing you have a cancerous tumor and waiting to see how big it would get before you have surgery. Chances are,,it would kill you before surgery as you left in doing nothing to harm it. 45 is the cancer, my friend.


Koz

[gulliver]

8. We're on our way up now, thanks to the Mueller Report

Let's see how long we can keep going up. Our strength is growing and the bad guys are weakening. We can wait while that trend continues. I would be happy with impeachment when we can win it. I would be happy with impeachment if we lose it but Trump and the Senate Republicans are then tossed out on their ear by the voters. I would be happy for our candidate to "impeach" Trump in the debates. I just see no reason to be in a hurry. The Constitution needs us to fight for it well.

[marylandblue]

10. I have a different diagnosis, Dr. Kozar.

Trump is a symptom, not the illness itself. The illness is the political divide in the country, that causes each side to look at the other as an enemy. One side is willing to vote for someone as bad as Trump simply because he is on their side. As long as the divide exists, new, more virulent Trumps will arise.

- Dr. Blue

[kozar]

13. I see your side,,

I see it as the symptoms are the hard core Trumpers and him the cancer. The racism,bigotry,hatred, was always there, the cancer brought it forefront, which caused the political divide to go to depths we have never seen before. I agree that we are discussing the exact same point at our fork in the road. We took different views to get to this place and now are discussing which fork to take. I hope to find you again on another road along the way with a celebration for our country to enjoy.


Koz

[durablend]

45. I'm wondering

If Trump outright called for Hillary and Obama to be arrested (which I would not put it past Public Enemy #1) would the negative nellies still be against impeaching the SOB?

[Eyeball_Kid]

78. What's not confusing is that...

We, as a nation, have devalued the presidential election to the extent that nearly HALF of all who voted wanted this scumbag to failthfully execute the laws he couldn't give a shit about. This isn't and wasn't a secret. Trumpy clearly displayed his disdain for the Rule of Law from the moment he announced his candidacy. So over 60 MILLION of us looked at Trumpy's bizarre, unethical, and criminal past and didn't give a shit about his moral fiber. Sure, the Russians had influenced the population, but their influence likely didn't make a difference to 90% of Trumpy voters who were going to vote for Trumpy anyway and didn't listen to all of the bots and hackers from St. Petersburg. The Russians had influence over a small number of people considered "marginal" voters-- enough to make a slight difference in battleground states (not including some obscure, but still suppressed, reports of behavior involving voting machine manipulations. Frankly, I'm wondering why the government so quickly insisted that the Russian effort NEVER breached the integrity of the vote. Are we to trust that Russians drew their own line in the sand? Why? Was it more important to convince the public that our voting is safe and accurate than to seriously address how the battleground states amazingly had Trumpy majority votes that all were slightly above the automatic recount threshhold?).

In a nation that cared about what a president represents and had faith that the Constitution was the backbone of our functioning as a nation, Trumpy wouldn't win a single primary and would have been run out of the campaigns on a rail. Now that we've given an evil maniac the levers of power, he's got it and he won't let it go. And he's destroying the structure of government to boot. Impeach? Hah! That won't stop Trumpy. He's on a roll, like it or not. He'll destroy whatever and whoever is in his way. Lindsey Graham knows. That's why he's kissing Trumpy's ass right now.

[Roland99]

9. Oh FFS

[FreepFryer]

12. The absurdity of this rationale argues for, rather than against, impeachment. (nt)

[CrispyQ]

14. Too late. The dems lost the narrative 40 years ago. -nt

[uponit7771]

28. +1, Republicans just make up shit now and the M$M considers their positions as if they're rational

[4now]

15. This is exactly what would happen without a Senate majority

We would end up looking like fools and trump and the republicans would win.
Very good post.

[PufPuf23]

16. Making impeachmernt about the Mueller report was/is a mistake.

Impeachment should have already been in progress from day 1 of the Democratic House.

The Mueller Report then would have exposed items for subsequent prosecutions.

IMO it is prudent to be wary of Mueller given his history, then he is GOP, and that he has a close friendship and professional relations with Barr lasting decades.

Parallel to any impeachment, investigations and prosecutions, we Democrats need to start a full court press on more votes and wins in rural and Red State USA. Waiting for the 2020 POTUS election to remove Trump is no sure thing and the damage done cascades until Trump followed by GOP control of anything is gone.

You first paragraph scenario may well be a strategy and one that succeeds for Trump and the GOP. The one way is to knee cap that narrative starting now.

There remains a divide within the Democratic party. To continue to delay and talk down impeachment is the position favored by the same Democratic leadership that got us in this mess. Reminds me of "impeachment is off the table" regards GWB and Fitzmas.

[Iggo]

17. Depends on which minute that is.

[mopinko]

18. do you think it only takes a minute to impeach?

the committee could drag it out to the election.
we dont need to bring down the gavel till we are good and ready, and there is blood all over the floor.

the minute we impeach, we own the narrative.

[uponit7771]

27. THIS !!!! The arguments against impeachment are falling apart as the facts come out. The arguments

... against impeachment intimate factually wrong political and procedural points.

I'm thinking FUD but I'm paranoid.

[brush]

19. Not impeaching means trump gets away with everything.

After getting the full report, calling Mueller to testify before Congress in open hearings with the public watching and learning how vile and corrupt trump and his sycophants have behaved in the dismantling of our institutions, then and only then should we proceed to impeachment and damn the repugs in the Senate.

Let the country know the orange a-hole does not belong anywhere near the WH. We will show that our party is the one defending the Constitution.

[cwydro]

48. Agree.

I’ve done a 180 on this impeachment thing.

Elizabeth Warren convinced me.

[azureblue]

64. correct

not impeaching means that Trump etc. will get away with it, again. Rules for the rich vs rules for the rest of us. And not impeaching will prove to the rest of the crooks in Don's cult that they can do what they want to and never have to pay the price.

Impeachment means the law of the land applies to all of us.

[brush]

85. If we don't impeach we may as well pack it in as a democracy as...

the road to a strongman/fascist will be greenlighted.

Checks and balances on a corrupt executive branch will no longer exist.

[FakeNoose]

20. We need to continue the investigation and call it "oversight"

If we call it "impeachment" then as you say, the Senate GOP takes over with their own agenda.

Don't forget the Watergate hearings that were watched on national TV by the entire country were not called impeachment hearings. There was no talk of impeachment until the hearings were just about completed. By then it was obvious that Nixon was a cooked goose.

[uponit7771]

25. Republicans call do all what you say ... WITHOUT ... impeachment. I don't see republicans responses

... to reality as a well grounded reason to do or not do anything.

If there is no impeachment we can be sure Baghdad Barr and Red Don with the help of the Russians will make sure to set the narrative without our input.

[uponit7771]

21. This is false on its face, come on ... democrats can walk and chew gum at the same time and

... the same wasn't said for republicans and their 2423143 investigations into Clinton in 2016

Clinton and Johnson impeachment proceedings hurt democrats even though they were not removed.

[kentuck]

26. When did we get "ownership" of the narrative?

I must have missed that one?

[INdemo]

30. Thats giving Republicans a cake walk...

..If the House votes to impeach then we will see the streets fill with Thousands of Voters, demanding that this Criminal be removed from the White House

If the Senate does not carry out their constitutional duties then they will weaken their chances big time to retain their Senate Majority.

[Blues Heron]

31. "Time is on our side"

[world wide wally]

32. Just because voters knew the Clinton impeachment was bogus, his popularity went up.

However, Democrats lost the WH, the Senate, and oathe House in the following election.
Republicans lost it all following Nixons impeachment as well.
My question is, how did this nonsense about Trump will win if we impeach him ever become a rule of thumb. It defies logic.

[Freethinker65]

33. Hold public hearings to expose how the Russian meddling was allowed to happen

Expose the Trump campaign and GOP's willingness to win at any cost, including using stolen information they begged to be hacked, refusing to sign a bipartisan letter indicating Russia was attempting to meddle before the election, the use of hacked and given voter data to engage in a targeted social media campaign of disinformation by a foreign government to boost Trump, the change of the Republican platform toward Russia, the people that have already been indicted or plead guilty, etc. Expose them all and get them to admit it was wrong.
Demand that this never be allowed to happen again.
After this, then decide whether to impeach.

[beachbum bob]

35. Pelosis is a tactic driven politician she knows how to exact maximum political price on GOP,

6 months of hearings for article of impeachment replicating the Mueller report on TV every day unfiltered on CSPAN, then pass the articled of Impeachment to the Senate for a trial sometime in May/June/July 2020. I predict McConnel WILL NOT bring the trial to the floor and will take "let the voters decide"....the perfect move to make the entire 2020 election all about corruption and trump and GOP unwillingness to follow rule of law.

the landslide will be huge for democrats

[joet67]

41. yours is a political argument. at some point, we need to STAND Up for something

[LovingA2andMI]

36. Bulls**t!!!

Don't Impeach and Lose the U.S. House. That's what this is coming down too. Period.

[McKim]

37. The Author is Afraid, Afraid to Stand Up!

With Trump as the darling of the news media because of his outrageous antics, we have never had control of the narrative! The danger of not impeaching is worse than the danger of impeaching.
Who will respect The Democratic Party if it rolls over for this one? Mr. And Ms. Nice Person is not a winning strategy.

[NotHardly]

38. BULL

[Mc Mike]

39. No, the dozen Dem congressional committee investigations would be adding impeachment

to their hearings and investigative goals.

You skip right past the House end, into the Senate with the blink of an eye.

The House can spend months investigating twitler and subpoena ing his people and docs.

[joet67]

40. the minute we don't impeach, is the minute we lose our country.

[FBaggins]

43. I don't think impeachment is the right move at this point... BUT this is based on faulty assumptions

The Senate certainly has a great deal of control over the proceedings, but not in the way that you appear to assume.

The House appoints the prosecutors. The President gets to mount a defense, but the Senate sits as judge and jury... they don't get to build their own case or make their own arguments.

[uponit7771]

60. We need the impeachment so impeachment investigations can be done ... And then...

... the impeachment managers are prosecutors can present their case

Right now Red Dot ink Crew I just going to tell us to go to hell on any requests

[FBaggins]

67. They're going to do that anyway.

There isn't much to the theory that a formal investigation gives Congress more authority (it certainly doesn't say so in the Constitution or explicitly in any law). At best it might convince a judge to release some 6(e) material... but I doubt there's much there to work with. If there was something damning in some grand jury testimony, why wouldn't Mueller let it inform his conclusions or cause him to prosecute someone?

Right now Red Dot ink Crew I just going to tell us to go to hell on any requests

They're even more likely to do so with an impeachment inquiry. As I mentioned above, it might marginally improve our chances with some content... but it would still go through the courts (likely all the way to SCOTUS).

[uponit7771]

69. That's not my understanding of the impeachment managers

... by understanding the impeachment managers have powers like prosecutors and if people obstruct Justice with them bake and bring charges upon those people also

[FBaggins]

70. They serve as the prosecutors during the Senate trial... but they have no special powers

They also have zero power to bring criminal charges against anyone (that's an executive branch function).

The House itself has limited powers to "charge" and adjudicate "contempt of Congress", but that power is limited to jailing the individual (upon a vote of the full House) - and even that is limited to the end of the session (which means they get out automatically in early January).

Any other criminal charge is limited to a referral to the DOJ.

Plus... there are no impeachment managers during the inquiry phase. They're appointed by the House after the President is impeached.

[eleny]

46. The minute we impeach is when an indelible stain covers the Trump presidency forever

The asterisk finds his name and will never be removed.

[wryter2000]

50. Where's the asterisk behind Bill Clinton's name? n/t

n/t

[standingtall]

65. It is there

I remember being specifically told by republicans that Clinton was the only President to ever be impeached. That's wasn't actually true, because there was actually two counting Johnson. So if we don't impeach Trump,Clinton will have a bigger asterisk than Trump. Sense Clinton will be 1 of only 2 Presidents to ever be impeached.

[eleny]

84. It's there and will be forever

No matter that it was for a flimsy reason, imo. But it's still there and referred to especially these days.

[wryter2000]

49. Exactly

And once we start impeachment hearings, they become the main and only focus on investigating him. We need to have multiple sets of hearings going on simultaneously so all the dirt is brought out on multiple fronts.

The goal is getting him out of office. It may sound high-minded that we have a duty to impeach him. Our duty is to removed him from office, and impeachment (at least at the present time) will not accomplish that.

[TryLogic]

55. Impeachment takes time. "The present time" will take quite awhile.

When it goes to the senate, McConnell can block it (Can McConnell block it??) as he did with Obama's supreme court nominee, proving once again what a scumbag he is. The people of Kentucky decide he must go -- in the 2020 election along with Trump. Sounds good!!

If McConnell lets the trial proceed (assuming he has a choice), the avalanche of evidence against Trump will put senate Repubs in a very difficult spot. Sounds good again!!

It is extremely important that persons who commit crimes be caught, prosecuted, and punished. Otherwise, there will be an avalanche of crime by those persons and many others. It is time to stop letting presidents and vice presidents get away with breaking laws. Recently, that would be Reagan, Bush, Clinton(?), Bush, and Cheney. So now we have the king of crime, Trump. We need to stop the damn pardons.

[uponit7771]

59. Dems can walk and chew gum at the same time

[TryLogic]

51. Having read the previous 46 posts on this thread and various others in the last 2-3 days...

I vote for impeachment proceedings. If it starts with "hearings," so be it.

When it is "hearings," I wonder what how much of a circus Repubs on committees will be able to create.

[elleng]

52. Right.

INVESTIGATE now.

At the end of the hearings, we will decide what punishment we support.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212038350

[empedocles]

53. Experience is so important in so many areas. Trust Pelosi et al, over the impatient crowd.

[shanti]

54. If anyone ever needed impeaching

it is Chump. We're damned if we do, and damned if we don't. Let's do it, Dems!

[better]

56. No.

We lose ownership of the narrative the moment impeachment goes to the Senate.
Not before.

To argue otherwise is to carry GOP water for them.

[maxsolomon]

57. No, the House acts as the Prosecutors in the Senate

Senators sit there and listen to the evidence. Roberts doesn't get to "stage manage" it, he presides. He's also super concerned with the appearance of impartiality, so I don't look for him to "Barr" it.

[Aaron Pereira]

58. This seems like a really defeatist approach.

We saved our dry powder from the Bush Presidency and now he's an honored ex-president and the Republican party never suffered the consequences of their own malfeasance.

Let's try a new way. Let's play offense for once and make them explain themselves in open hearings and see where that leads.

[artislife]

61. I think we are

not capable of knowing everything that our leaders know.

[Yavin4]

66. So, Trump really can shoot someone on 5th Avenue and get away with it.

Good to know. I'll stay off 5th avenue.

[KelleyKramer]

68. Are you quoting Sean Hannity?

I don't see a link, that's a Sean Hannity quote, right??

[FiveGoodMen]

71. That is the exact opposite of what happened when the GOP impeached Clinton

[Jakes Progress]

72. ???? Were you there?

Was Clinton removed from office? Did the nation cheer the republicans for bringing impeachment hearings?

[amywalk]

73. How about we wait until the House has done it's oversight duty and

investigated Trump and his associates before we decide? If there is enough evidence, we impeach. If not, we don’t.

[VOX]

74. "Lose ownership of the narrative?" There are now TWO very different ongoing simultaneous narratives.

One says Trump is a god, heaven-sent to destroy all perceived-as-liberal institutions and protocols, and to punish POC, women, LGBT folk, Democrats, progressives, etc. And it’s the stuff of insular cults, and it’s very dangerous.

The other narrative says that Trump is a clear and present danger to democracy, is incompetent, has been enriching himself at taxpayer’s expense, and is rubbing shoulders with the world’s dictators.

The Trump crime family has pulled this country so far rightward that it’ll take years (decades, maybe) to pull the country together again — if that’s even possible, post-Trump.

Without impeachment to make public the actions of this CRIMINAL administration, forget the narrative; we’ll lose ownership of the United States.

[KentuckyWoman]

75. Impeach anyway

hearings should start now. Maybe they will take 2 years but I doubt it.

[doc03]

80. Bullshit!

[Kablooie]

81. Impeaching right now without the whole story is a fools errand.

Congress needs the unreacted report, the grand jury evidence, the intelligence and probably some info on Trumps financial situation.
And this all has to be brought to the public before triggering impeachment.

It will take knowing as much as we can about the situation before jumping off.

I know it's frustrating because this will all take time, but it's essential so that if Republicans let him off easy it will be apparent to the public that that's what they are doing.

There is a lot more to know and we must know it before starting impeachment procedures.

[pecosbob]

82. I say BS to the OP...investigative hearings are called for

Dems can and should investigate the numerous cases of wrondoing by the administration. They would take an extended period of time. Even if impeachment is the end result that would not come for a year or more. The Senate will not get to intervene in any proceedings until such a time as impeachment proceedings are begun. This give Dems carte blanche in who or what they wish to investigate leading up to the next election. Failure to expose as much of this criminality to the American people as possible would be an abject failure and abdication of responsibility, even if Dems are successful in the next round of elections. Failure to do so would normalize GOP criminality just like it did after Iran/Contra, the GOP's continued commission of election fraud over tha last several decades, fake weapons of mass destruction in Iran, etc. The Dems should have every cabinet member of this administration called to the carpet, from Nielsen, to DeVos, Mnuchkin, Bolton, et al., as well as all the myriad law-breaking supporters involved in the administration's crimes, such as Erik Prince and all the GOP's money launderers in the Senate.

We need to use the law to break down the criminal conspiracy that is the GOP, from their money laundering to their election fraud, their graft and corruption and absolute disregard for the rights of the American people.

[Fiendish Thingy]

83. No evidence to support your assertion, just fear based defeatism.

In fact, there is a lot of evidence (see links in my sig line) that impeachment would work in our favor.

Impeachment is not a singular act; it consists of many parts, including an impeachment inquiry, with hearings where executive privilege cannot be invoked. Indeed, it can drag Trump through the dirt, but it must be framed as an impeachment inquiry to have the authority to circumvent the court delays that Trump wants to run out the clock.

Once the house votes and send the articles to the Senate, the prosecution is controlled by "managers" from the house, the president can provide for his own defense, and the senate sits as the jury (not sure if the senators can ask questions, but Mitch can't "stage manage" as the trial will be run by Chief Justice Roberts).

[SunSeeker]

86. Wrong. We lose if we don't stand firm and do our Constitutional duty.

Time is not on our side. We need to strike while the iron is hot. Mueller handed it off to us.

[DallasNE]

87. Trump Is Helping The Democrats

By tying everything up in court on matters he is sure to lose, like suing Cummings over blocking his subpoena for his corporate financial records. Trump can't blame the Democrats for foot dragging when he is the cause for the delay.

As I have posted elsewhere, the earliest impeachment hearings could start is Labor Day. But right after the annual August recess could even be optimistic. By then we would have access to most of the redacted data in the Mueller report and the public testimony of Rosenstein, Mueller, McGahn and others. It would be the drip, drip, drip of a thousand cuts. By then it could well be too late for the Republican Senate to revive a mortally wounded Trump. Indeed, they could be more interested in saving their own skin than saving Trump. Trump could no longer hold a primary challenge over their head as they could now withstand that challenge as a couple of early losses woulld put an end to that.

But the Democrats need to run dignified hearings and avoid the grandstanding. The facts alone are on their side.