It is wrong now, on the left, to be concerned about different-but-entirely-real things? You are not worried by the effects of rhetoric on an uninformed populace? The internet left are such assholes.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Nancy Pelosi won’t send the articles of impeachment to the Senate until she feels they’ll get a fair hearing.
- Thread starter Exellus
- Start date
So, leave key events, partisan fuckery, and an utter and blatant betrayal of their oaths out because "that's just Republicans for ya!" The Senate likely clearing him doesn't mean they should be allowed to cheat the system. Announcing corruption should fucking matter and people like you just enable it by giving them a pass.
Honestly, who gives a shit what the Republican party thinks, because you know what, they don't give a shit about what you think.
It's time to start fighting fire with fire. The GOP has shown (multiple times) that they've got no problem playing dirty to get what they want. You don't fight that by playing nice, like the Democrats have. You fight that by punching back.
It's a negative for the Democrats that people in support of impeaching Trump remained the same, which is over 50%? Sorry but them not convincing the utterly lost 35 to 40% of the country is not a negative, it's just the way it is and it's certainly not helping the GOP at all.
I'd love to know where you got the idea that impeachment's sole purpose was to force the Senate's hand. I'm simply dumbfounded by the number of people on Era pretending that this is in any way a negative for Democrats.
Based on your posts, you're being defeatist. Being defeatist is easy and doesn't help anyone.
Agreed. This is playing by GOP rules, and honestly, I don't find this tactic that dirty. It's just damn smart given how we've seen the other side play.
Like clockwork people come out of the woodwork to complain/concern troll "but...but... think of the precedence!" or the like. News flash the GOP is not and hasn't been impartial for decades now. Democrats trying to play "by the rules" and upholding decorum is why so much of the crap we have to deal with no exists. When one side truly couldn't care less about the rules and does anything they can do to win no matter how scummy said things are AND actually wins/gets what they want playing by the rules is pointless.
Kids are in cages, the gop controls the Supreme Court (due to screwing Obama/Mitch obstructing) people are dying or sick because health care/costs are such a mess, people can't afford insulin, and record amounts of people are in poverty and most people are a few hundred dollars away from bring homeless but who cares about any of that when you can just the Dems "did the right/moral thing!" /s 🙄
Nancy is doing EXACTLY what the dems should have started doing in 2008.
Kids are in cages, the gop controls the Supreme Court (due to screwing Obama/Mitch obstructing) people are dying or sick because health care/costs are such a mess, people can't afford insulin, and record amounts of people are in poverty and most people are a few hundred dollars away from bring homeless but who cares about any of that when you can just the Dems "did the right/moral thing!" /s 🙄
Nancy is doing EXACTLY what the dems should have started doing in 2008.
He know's the damage a witness testimony can potentially do if it comes from Mulvaney, Bolton, or Pompeo. So even if Trump asks for it he doesn't want to go for it. They're trying to protect him fully.
Am I missing something or isn't the easy counter to the argument that delay = weak case simply quoting McConnell's promise to rig the whole process? I don't think that's a hard thing to explain to the American people.
I wouldn't trust the general American populace with basic facts.
The Senate GOP over-telegraphed their strategy and anyone paying attention to this knows the House articles aren't weak, they're backed by Trump's own comments and actions.
This is a damn good response to all the "waste of time" naysayers but as you can see from the posts here they're still somehow not happy 😑
Agreed. Hell, this could even be framed like that bullshit they pulled with the Supreme Court pick. Elections are only 11 months away! No need to rush such an important decision. We'll let the next Senate/President/etc. decide on it. Or whatever bullshit reason they pulled.
I want the part where I said give this a pass. I'm worried the strategy is dangerous. I don't think those are equivalent things. And I'm getting kind of tired of the words being put in my mouth as well as the labels that are being so freely applied. Be best is a bust.
I don't support Trump. I support Warren right now, and would be thrilled if Bernie won. I'd love it even more if they just joined together like superheroes to snag 50-some percent right before Iowa. Get Jay Inslee in there to play Robin at the EPA. I will vote for any Dem who receives the nominee, minus Tulsi.
I have no idea why I'm being framed so harshly for being worried about strategy. For the member who basically said I was wrong to not be celebrating and I must be a Trump voter. Naw, motherfucker. That is unbelievably rude. I do not want to be associated with that racist assclown, here or anywhere. Don't.
I'm not celebrating because this is politics. There isn't time for that shit. I can't believe people here don't understand that yet have the gall to call me uninformed. Oh well. There's probably a thread about toilet paper that isn't an angry mob when one contrary opinion pipes up.
I think the McConnell and Graham and put themselves in a bad position when they admitted explicitly they weren't going to be fair. If they had pretended to be fair that would have made Pelosi's move less tenable IMO.
Who all has the power to send the articles of impeachment to the House? I'm just trying to figure out any fuckery they could do to get around.
Wow mitch and graham fucked up popping off the mouth like that. I think this is a great move by the dems
How about pausing the nomination process for most of the presidents judicial nominees including a supreme court justice? I would say, that was more insanely uncooperative and it worked out just fine for them.
I don't find this uncooperative on the Democrats part if they are just looking for a fair trial.
Holy shit. Not even hiding it. Let's hope this is blasted on news.
The president is so innocent, they dont even want to hear any witnesses that could potentially "clear him of wrong doing". Wow.
And these aholes complain about "hearsay". So based on the president, he is innocent and that is good enough for them? Mmmhmm right.
Welp, Merry Christmas and Happy Impeachment New Year.
The framing is perfect. Nothing to be done/not our fault if everyone's on vacation. Besides, I can't name the managers until the Senate formally announces how the trial is going to go down. Can't hand over the resolutions until the managers are announced. Dotting all the Ts, crossing all the Is, and so forth.
The framing is perfect. Nothing to be done/not our fault if everyone's on vacation. Besides, I can't name the managers until the Senate formally announces how the trial is going to go down. Can't hand over the resolutions until the managers are announced. Dotting all the Ts, crossing all the Is, and so forth.
Every Democrat, every single day, needs to say "All we want is a fair trial, with witnesses testifying, like every other trial in America."
Pelosi can translate this into concrete demands:
- Graham must recuse himself.
- There must be a process in place that allows Democrats to subpoena witnesses.
- There must be a broad structure for the trial that does not include summary dismissal or anything like it.
And it's their only strategy, they're not prepared for anything else. They can't replicate the strategy of House Republicans who kept trying to distract with their bullshit, because they can't afford to lose any seat. And some of the testimonies could make it more difficult for some of the moderates to vote against removing him.
And the more we will learn, the more demand there will be to see other evidences, which will make their case even harder.
If Pelosi could somehow force them to bring in witnesses it would be a huge victory.
I think the second demand would be a hard ask after denying that ability to the House GOP but the other two are definitely reasonable.
Tim Morrison and Kurt Volker did testify though. The whistleblower was not approved and neither was Hunter Biden.
As per that person's post, this theoretical "average uninterest person" will maybe see a headline every so often. So that counts to you or I, but whether it touches the sides for the silent majority...
I wonder how Trump is spinning this stock market rally on the news of his impeachment? 🤔
Oh, were those subpoenas? I thought they were just requested by the GOP and the Dems agreed.
I like it. It's about maintaining the narrative. If they are goiing to have the sham of a trail then make the story about that and not about how Trump was acquitted. Even if the narriative changes to dems are afraid it's still kind of the smart move. It's a lot harder to sell that, than what is technical fact about Trumps removal.
Centre left maybe but I wouldn't throw her into a same category as more progressive politicians like Bernie, AOC etc.
I think the best part about this strategy, if it pans out, is it denies the GOP what they want right now which is a speedy dismissal then a return to their usual fuckery. Keep the pressure on as long as you can.
On NPR this morning they were talking about Trent Lott's involvement in the Clinton Senate Trial.
It was mentioned that Monica Lewinsky was almost called as a witness but it was decided they didn't want any witnesses (maybe worried about it being too crass for a live audience?) and everything was done behind closed doors.
Hoping that's not the case here and that Dems can demand witnesses actually appear for this Trial (and that this thing is televised).
It was mentioned that Monica Lewinsky was almost called as a witness but it was decided they didn't want any witnesses (maybe worried about it being too crass for a live audience?) and everything was done behind closed doors.
Hoping that's not the case here and that Dems can demand witnesses actually appear for this Trial (and that this thing is televised).
House has sole power and discretion over impeachment. The House technically isn't done with it's process. That process can take as long as the House Speaker wants it to take.
Honestly, if McConnell gets his hands on these Articles, I doubt there will even be a trial.
He'll just call a vote, end it and move on with his pathetic life.
Let's be honest, House Dem Reps don't have much work to do since every bill they send to the Senate is dead on arrival. They should spend as much time as they can on every media outlet repeating the same story every day.
Its done. The house just went on break till January without voting for the impeachment managers and without them they cant send over the articles of impeachment. Now how long Pelosi is willing to hold them & how long Mcconell is unwilling to guarantee anything other than a sham trial only those two know.
Really hope Pelosi sticks with this. Some articles I've read seem to be implying that she'll back down as soon as January comes
I really don't see why she would. I really doubt that public opinion is going to sway in favor of the group that's been bragging for weeks about how fast they're going to quash this.
Glad the Dems aren't giving the GOP a pass and hoping they have some sort of moral compass. Hammer this shit home.
And thank fucking God Pelosi the smarts in the political acumen to not jump the gun on impeachment!
Good. Delay this forever until after the election just like they did with Garland.