Nancy Pelosi: ‘I’m not for impeachment… I don’t think we should go down that path’

Trump Delivers State of the Union Address

On Monday, the White House revealed the “Trump Budget,” Donald Trump and Stephen Miller’s wish-list of slashed entitlement programs and billions of dollars for The Wall. Vanity Fair called the Trump Budget a “true House of Horrors” which would “slash spending on programs that benefit society’s most vulnerable individuals, like the poor, elderly, and disabled by roughly $1 trillion.” Medicare would be cut by Medicare $846 billion hit. A $26 billion slash for Social Security. In the same news cycle as Trump’s monstrous budget – which, to be fair, is already being called “dead on arrival” – the Washington Post published an interview with Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Pelosi breaks some news about how she feels about all of the impeachment conversations. Some highlights:

Pelosi on whether Trump has done anything good for Democrats: “He’s been a great organizer for Democrats, a great fundraiser for Democrats and a great mobilizer at the grass-roots level for Democrats. [Laughs.] And I think that’s good for America.

Whether she’s pro-impeachment: “I’m not for impeachment. This is news. I’m going to give you some news right now because I haven’t said this to any press person before. But since you asked, and I’ve been thinking about this: Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country. And he’s just not worth it.

Whether she feels Trump is fit to be president:
“Are we talking ethically? Intellectually? Politically? What are we talking here? [WaPo: “All”] All of the above. No. No. I don’t think he is. I mean, ethically unfit. Intellectually unfit. Curiosity-wise unfit. No, I don’t think he’s fit to be president of the United States. And that’s up to us to make the contrast to show that this president — while he may be appealing to you on your insecurity and therefore your xenophobia, whether it’s globalization or immigrants — is fighting clean air for your children to breathe, clean water for them to drink, food safety, every good thing that we should be doing that people can’t do for themselves. You know, I have five kids, and I think I can do everything for them, but I can’t control the air they breathe, the water that they drink. You depend on the public sector to do certain things for the health and well-being of your family, and he is counter to that. But again, this is coming across too negatively. I don’t usually talk about him this much. This is the most I’ve probably talked about him.”

[From The Washington Post]

How do I say this? I understand why she’s saying this, and I understand the party politics and the realpolitik behind what she’s saying. I get it. But I still think she’s wrong. Let me explain! Pelosi understands that if she and the Democratic Party start to seriously bang the impeachment drum, it hijacks everything in Washington. They don’t have control of the Senate either, so House Democrats going all-in on some kind of impeachment movement would end up being a fool’s errand which goes nowhere. That being said, I would prefer if Pelosi kept impeachment on the table. By completely shrugging off that conversation, she’s actually helping normalize what has been more than two years of un-American fascism from this orange monster. We’re treating him like some kind of dumb riddle that we’re too busy or horrified to solve. No, keep talking about impeachment, because none of this sh-t is normal.

Opening Day of the 116th Congress

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

86 Responses to “Nancy Pelosi: ‘I’m not for impeachment… I don’t think we should go down that path’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. grabbyhands says:

    Pelosi on whether Trump has done anything good for Democrats: “He’s been a great organizer for Democrats, a great fundraiser for Democrats and a great mobilizer at the grass-roots level for Democrats. [Laughs.] And I think that’s good for America.

    This may be technically true, but whether or not the Democrats can avoid shooting themselves in the foot again remains to be seen and early signs are troubling. The 2020 election isn’t a lock by any means.

    • jan90067 says:

      No, it’s not. Not only because it’s becoming a clown-car of candidates declaring, but because there is already infighting btwn. Sanders Bernie Bros. (and him only releasing 2014 taxes, nothing more recent), but some are already attacking others digging up dirt (Gillibrand/Klorbuchar being “mean” to staff; ignoring harassment). Then there’s the ongoing debate of “will he/won’t he” with Biden…. Who will have enough in the war chest to qualify for the debate…

      What interested me in Pelosi’s quote about impeachment: “…HE’S not worth it…” NOT “IT’S NOT worth it”… but “HE’S NOT…” I think she’s playing him in the sense that she KNOWS this will get under that thin skinned hide of that massive, narcissistic ego, and he will respond and make even more mistakes. This buffoon doesn’t seem to realize the things he’s said in print and on video. And sending Sarah Suckabee out to deny, deny, deny just gives more fodder.

      I’m willing to wait a little while, and see where this is going. Mueller is funded through Sept. So let’s see what’s coming down the pike. Lots of Pundits I follow on Twitter are saying there ARE sealed indictments on the three idiot kids AND Kushner (who they are likening to a modern day Benedict Arnold, and *very* dangerous).

      Meanwhile….get out there and volunteer for the Blue Wave! Make calls, write postcards, canvas, and keep working on voter registration!! 🌊🌊🌊

      • Harryg says:

        Agree, telling Trump he’s not worth the attention is the worst he can think. That he would be ignored? What? That can’t happen!
        He’s gonna rattle his golden baby-rattle.

      • Paige says:

        Great points! Also speaker Pelosi-(I have such respect for her!), knows the drip-drip will be happening everyday with these investigations. At some point-god knows what it will take-it will be republicans that for there own survival will be talking removal…her brilliant subtle shade ’he’s not worth it’-is DESTROYING the malignant narcissist in chief!

    • B n A fan says:

      I don’t understand why some Dems like to put the Democrats down. Last year they mobilized and won back the 🏡. Yet, we are talking about they may not be able to walk and chew gum. I never hear the deplorables put down the Republicans or Don the Con. They are dispictable, IMO, but they stick together like glue.

      IMO, one of the reasons Hillary lost the election was because lots of Dems put her down. I still hear on tv every day that no matter what the deplorables stick with 45, to me, this reinforced his base to stick with him. Can you imagine if Hillary had won and lies every day about every thing and divide the country as he is doing, the news would be tearing her down everyday not saying no matter what her base will stick with her. This is just my opinion.

      Btw, I agree with Nancy, although I would like to see impeachment starts, it would not pass the Senate , so we have to either vote him out next year or wait until they have a tape of him doing something that he can’t denied. IMO, I know he was working with the Russians/Putin and stole the presidency. I hope Cohen has a tape of him with a pile of money he stole from the people, or some other crimes I’m sure he committed.

      • Snowflake says:

        Yes, I agree, Republicans stick together more than Democrats do. They decide to back someone, everyone else falls in line. We spend too much time picking our candidates apart so our votes are divided, ex bernie, causing Republicans to win.

    • BPM says:

      The biggest issue for the Dems at the moment is the same as it was in 2016. The DNC and the corporate donors want a corporate candidate and there’s a large chunk of the base that simply won’t support a ‘corporate shill’

      Personally I’m sick of these gotcha moments the press keep bringing up. ‘Oh this candidate is unelectable because when they were 18 they said blah, blah blah’
      IDGAF! Talk about their policies and stop with the muckracking.

  2. BuddyJack says:

    She’s right. It would be an empty exercise in futility and would never get past the senate portion. Therefore the wasted effort would take away from real work that has an impact. We didn’t elect these people to throw impotent party hissy fits. It may feel good but it would be a foolish waste of energy and likely irritate the moderates over its futility. Court the mods with policy !

    • ByTheSea says:

      Agreed. She’s basically saying “this is 2019. We don’t have the time or the bodies in the Senate to get it done. And since we’re not removing him, get your butts out there–Democrats–and vote in 2020.”

    • Good GRrrrrl says:

      For anyone w real litigation experience, keep yer farkin hand to yerself. Me agreeth w Madame Speaker wholeheartedly.

    • BlahBlah says:

      AGREE! And she did keep it on the table by saying if anything compelling came out she’d reconsider. That’s leaving the door open.

  3. Michael says:

    I think Trump will do anything to stay in office because the day he leaves the White House he will likely be indicted on multiple felonies. Impeachment may backfire on the Democrats the way it did on the Republicans but keeping Trump in office may endanger democracy.

  4. MattyLove says:

    I think she’s being smart, actually. She left the door open for action based on the Mueller report. Otherwise, he’s doing a fine job of ruining his own chances at reelection. The Democrats just need to put up someone reasonably moderate that non-Democrats won’t vote against. I agree this is the least divisive and least damaging approach. If you impeach the president without irrefutable evidence, the Republican base will double down out of misguided principle.

    • Silver Charm says:

      Agree with everything except Democrats having to put someone reasonably moderate as a candidate. Dems shouldn’t have to compromise their values for people who no longer have any. I’m tired of kowtowing to a group of people who would never do the same if the roles were reversed.

      • Kitten says:

        I’m all for moderates on the state and local level–we need those purple states desperately–but as the face of the party? No. I don’t think a moderate is the answer to getting more votes. In fact, I would argue that we would LOSE votes if that happens because there are so many people yearning for a true progressive–people who maybe didn’t vote in the last election. And I think that segment of the voting populous is much larger and more important in 20/20 than the Never Trump coalition.

        Also, every time the Dems shift further to the right to appease a faction of the base, we collectively shift the overton window in the GOP’s favor. We REALLY need to start moving further left and staying consistent about that, even if it means we lose a small faction of left-leaning voters. To myself and many other independents, this is what we’re looking for from the Democratic party. (but don’t worry, I’ll vote blue even if it’s Biden or Harris)

      • Darla says:

        So my problem with this is that I strongly believe we all have different definitions of who is a moderate. I am so far to the left on criminal justice reform, on BLM, on race, I take a back seat to no one. I will bet for sure many of the Berners who consider themselves the be all and end all of the left are vehemently against reparations. I am not. I want all non violent drug offenders, every single one of them, pardoned today. I mean I could go on. Bottom line, the folks who think they get to define moderate and progressive, are wrong.

      • Kitten says:

        Personally, I have not encountered one Bernie-supporter who’s against reparations. That being said, Bernie needs to do better on how he defines reparations. I was arguing with one supporter on Twitter who kept insisting that Bernie’s plan for reparations was the same as Warren’s. When I asked how she knows that, she said “because he said so.” : /
        Ok well he said he’s against cash payouts (Warren never said that) so fine, but then WHAT is his idea?

        The problem with the reparations question is that all the candidates have only really addressed it in general terms. What do reparations look like? I’m waiting for Warren to come out with something more technical, because I think that’s what she does best: creating policy that while imperfect, is still very bold and comprehensive in terms of implementation. The other candidates who have endorsed reparations are pretty much in the same boat insofar as they’ve only discussed it in a general sense. If we are going to have this conversation (and FFS it is TIME) then we need to begin to get more specific.

      • Darla says:

        I agree about Warren, and hope she does it. I was blown away listening to her on Ari explaining her plan for the tech companies. This is a woman who comes prepared.

      • Kitten says:

        Oh damn I need to watch that, Darla! I’ve been eating up so many of her interviews lately but haven’t seen that one yet. Thanks for the reminder!

      • B n A fan says:

        I saw Warren on TV about a month ago and was VERY impressed with her. I told my daughter that she is really smart. I hope she stays in there for the long haul. I’m waiting to see what Beto is going to do. I also like the that young man, I cannot pronounce his name, he’s the youngest of the bunch and is gay. I like him a lot 2.

        I know the press wants Joe to enter so they can tear him down. He has been in politics for about 50 years, don’t know if he can withstand all that baggage he will be pulling around. The Anita Hill hearing will be enough to drag him down, so can’t see him withstanding Don the Con unslaught. He will be transferring all his sins to Joe on top of joe’s baggage.

      • Kitten says:

        The Anita Hill stuff will haunt him and I can’t help but wonder if there’s some #MeToo type stuff in his background. Maybe not but I wouldn’t be surprised if GOP operatives had someone waiting in the wings to talk about Uncle Joe’s inappropriate behavior. Hope I’m wrong though.

        Yay! Yeah the Pod Save America guys just call him “Mayor Pete” but his last name is pronounced Boot-Edge-Egde. He’s awesome. Love him. Not sure I see him as presidential material YET though. But again, I’m not fully committed to anyone yet. I really like what I’ve heard from Buttigieg.

      • Lightpurple says:

        If you have a chance to see Warren speak, GO! She is brilliant, warm, funny, engaging in person and that doesn’t translate too well on a TV or computer screen. She can give a 5 minute economic history of the last century that breaks complex economic principles down into easily understood, fixable problems. I’m proud of my Senator

      • hezzer19 says:

        I love Buttigieg! His CNN town hall was amazing. I loved everything he had to say. I get that he’s young, and inexperienced on the national level, but I think he has it in him.

        On the other hand…he’d be a fantastic VP to our first female President. He can run for POTUS in 2028.

      • B n A fan says:

        Thanks @kitten, yes, Mayor Pete was who is was talking about, I like him very much. Remember they said BO was not ready, but he was. I guess if he gets the right people helping him…. who knows. Btw, anyone is more ready than 45.

    • PlayItAgain says:

      Agreed, Mattylove. And there’s nothing wrong with being a moderate. It means you’re willing to compromise on some things—which is essential in politics.

      • BuddyJack says:

        Thank you. I am so tired of the belief that compromise is loss. Compromise is when everyone is pissed off but gets something they wanted 🤪. We cannot keep up with this entrenched deadlock.

      • Kitten says:

        Sure, but all Democrats do is compromise. Always. I don’t see it working very well for the party when we have Trump and two years with no control of any of the three branches. Yet it was unequivocally progressive energy that buoyed Democrats’ win in the House.

        That being said, winning in 2020 is SUCH an imperative and I understand that we have to be thoughful and strategic about how we win. That’s why I’m really holding off on throwing my support to any one candidate YET (although I do love Warren) and I’m basically ignoring all the polls. It’s still so early and I think it’s hard to really guage which candidates will be the frontrunners. I’m not cool with Biden–at all–but if he’s the choice then I’ll give him my support.

        Because absolutely NOTHING is more important to me than beating Trump. If shifting the party further left has to wait another few years then I’m fine with that. We already have most candidates for the GND and M4A so that’s progress in and of itself.

    • BearcatLawyer says:

      I agree. This is classic Nancy Pelosi. She made it personal to irritate Chump and distract him from the several other plans she has to destabilize him and tear the Republithug party to shreds. Say what one will about Nancy, but she is not stupid.

    • BuddyJack says:

      Agree completely. I am a true political centrist based on policy — and no I’m not wish washy, I feel strongly about various policies from both sides. (Although what they say and then actually do is seldom consistent 🙄).

      Those in the middle swing elections and there are more centrists than ever because the extremes in both sides have irritated their bases. All studies point to more and more unaffiliated voters. I truly believe that the Dems would be very much negatively impacted by going too progressive. All these centrists/moderates (and there are more than ever) couldn’t handle it. The end result would be more 3rd party votes, or (god forbid) some may even hold their nose, vomit and vote for Trump.

      I know there are others who disagree but I can promise you that if Dems put up,someone that the Reps can with any traction spin as “socialist”…’s a recipe for disaster. If you think the middle America Joe(Sie) Blows couldn’t handle HRC….🙄

      • MattyLove says:

        I agree BuddyJack. I’m a liberal-ish moderate living in the deep, deep red midwest. They consider ME extreme in my views. The Dems need to put up someone who, quite frankly, is unoffensive to the moderate-ish conservative voters. These are people who were truly convinced that they “had” to vote for Trump because Hillary was going to take away their guns and start “killing all the babies.” So many of these people were NOT pro-Trump. They were just more strongly Anti-Hillary. And they believed it was their God-given duty to keep her out. We’ve gotta start somewhere and far, far left won’t be something they’ll buy into. It will assure more votes for Trump, even if they disagree with many things about him. Baby steps and long-gaming is what’s needed. Plus, we won’t bring people over to more liberal positions by jamming it down their throats. They’ll just double down in protest.

      • Darla says:

        Im sorry, they believed Hillary was going to kill all the babies? And we have to cater to this crowd? Trump is right now telling the country that democrats kill babies after they are born. We have to cater to the people who believe this? Why don’t the republicans ever have to nominate a moderate to win independents? To not frighten moderates? No I reject this.

        Let’s get out our base. They have been pulling this off; electing more and more extreme right wing loon and forcing us into moderation by suppressing our votes. This is part of the revolution we need in this country, a voting rights revolution. Another thing Wall Street isn’t responsible for – keeping people from voting

      • Kitten says:

        @ Darla- I completely agree. The 2016 Dem narrative was all about getting the *white working class* vote so what will 2020 be about? Getting disenfranchised Trump voters by compromising on progressive values? Eff that.

        Oh and BTW, the white working class narrative was mostly bullshit because after we allowed them to hold the Dem party hostage, most voted for Trump or didn’t vote at all, anyway.

        I feel like 2016 has taught us absolutely nothing.

      • PeggingOut says:

        Hard to really disagree with Buddy Jack on this. Just read an article entitled “Democrats get their own Tea Party” and while I laughed at the title…..yeah there is something there.

        Sure 2016 taught us something. That the intellectual self righteous in the far left can and did get a comeuppance.

        Dems should learn and deliver the same message to the entitled and emblazened far right in 2020.

        Be smart Dems. Read the current tea leaves.

      • Catt Berlin George says:

        @Darla and Kitten I so agree with your take on this. In addition, IMO the Dems are too wishy-washy and polite and let’s shake hands and all that political politesse that will NOT work in 2020 after Trump. Dems must realize that they will never please everyone so stop trying because they will dilute their message over and over doing this. They focus on the ‘other’ instead of their own messaging. and you think they would have figured this out by now. I can’t understand why they haven’t.

  5. Toot says:

    I agree with Nancy because the Senate won’t be on board, and it will just mobilize his supporters.

  6. Christina says:

    When Clinton went through impeachment, it was the same situation because Democrats held the senate and they weren’t going to get rid of him because of his successes. It harmed the Republican Party at the time to spend all of that money and time on something that was never going to go anywhere since women mattered even less in the public sphere as we do now. A lot of the public didn’t support getting rid of Clinton, and a lot of people who voted for Obama also voted for Donald Trump. Yes, there is extensive gerrymandering, but people are more open to authoritarianism all over the world. They don’t want the world to change.

    We have to face that Trump is a symptom. Our problems are way bigger than Trump, and Pelosi knows it. She needs public support for it, and Trump supporters aren’t budging. They don’t care what he is: they want what they want, and we are in a more dangerous situation than we were with Clinton because Trump and his administration are so incompetent. She’s the best at doing the cost-benefit analysis on this in my book as badly as I want him gone, but the fear that people who fear losing status have is in a ton of people. And I know a lot of minorities who support and voted for him. They blow my mind, but a lot of cultures are conservative and end up supporting Republican ideas when they come to the United States.

    • Lightpurple says:

      Actually, Republicans held the Senate. Trent Lott was Senate Majority leader. They still couldn’t get it done because they had nothing. A bunch of adulterous liars and Lindsey Graham impeached a guy for being an adulterous liar and they couldn’t get it past their own party in the Senate.

      • Christina says:

        Yes! You are right.Thanks, light purple. My faulty memory.

      • Becks1 says:

        Yeah, republicans held the senate, but not much, which is why they couldn’t get him removed (even if every R had really really wanted to and had voted accordingly.) Heck even the impeachment itself happened during the lame duck session.

  7. Lightpurple says:

    Goddess of Shade!

    “I don’t usually talk about him this much. This is the most I’ve probably talked about him.” “And he’s just not worth it.”

    She is brilliant. She knows full well that her committees are ripping open every dark closet and hideaway in his life and the lives of his family and associates and shining bright spotlights in there, exposing the rot and corruption. She knows that they WILL find something “compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan” and when they do, she will, with measured authority, say that she had hoped that this would not have come to pass but he leaves her no options but to impeach. Putting it all on HIM!

    ETA Meanwhile, he’s going to blow a gasket over “Nancy” not thinking about him.

    • BearcatLawyer says:

      THIS. She knows how to get him to play right into her hands.

    • Christin says:

      She blew a hole in one of his often replayed tunes, which is “they” are obsessively going after him instead of working for the people. The ego slap combined with this is amazing.

      Gaslight the gaslighter.

    • Esmom says:

      Yes. My impression has been that she’s playing the long game. A very strategic one. She is a master.

      Now if she’d just take a cue from Mayor Pete B and start referring to him as the Porn Star President, Trump would really start to go nuts, lol.

      • Lightpurple says:

        No, she can’t. She can’t do that. She has to be the measured, moderated voice of calm and reason. The grownup in the room. Others can do all the fun stuff but it is her job to steer us through and land us safely.

  8. mom2two says:

    I wish she would keep impeachment on the table too. My guess is that because the Senate is Republican and Trump’s enabler in chief-Mitch Mc Connell-is the Senate Majority Leader, there is no way they’d get a bipartisan agreement for impeachment.
    It will be the same situation as they did with Clinton, the House will vote to impeach and the Senate will acquit. Trump stays in office and continues to erode democracy.
    I think if the Democrats had a majority in the Senate or knew they’d get enough Republicans to vote for impeachment in the Senate, she’d keep it on the table. The Senate Republicans are much like Trump supporters-he could kill someone in front of them- and they’d still support him (and didn’t he say something to that effect?).

    • Tiny Martian says:

      I don’t think it is completely off the table. She said “Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country.”

      Which to me suggests that if the evidence against Trump and co is compelling, overwhelming and bipartisan, she’ll consider it.

    • Lightpurple says:

      They have to be seen as going through the process and investigating all leads before she comes out for impeachment

  9. Becks1 says:

    He is never going to be removed from office with the current Senate, so I agree with her that Trump “isn’t worth it” because it will end up being bad for Democrats, and could potentially help the Rs in 2020. At this point, it seems that working against his re-election is our best bet.

    But I disagree that she is taking it off the table. I think if something comes out – that he’s selling state secrets to Russia or something – it will be back on the table – and she says that in the interview.

    I do love her dig that “he isn’t worth it” because you know that’s going to bother him.

  10. Chef Grace says:

    The Great Orange Poison will have a Twitter melt down. Maybe he will blow a gasket.

  11. Dorothy#1 says:

    I honestly think Pense is waaay more dangerous than Trump. Trump is an idiot who cant get anything done. I truly believe our country would be in a dire position with the ultra conservative Pense.

    • mycomment says:

      he got his tax cuts; and is leaving the country with its greatest deficit ever — that we will never be able to climb out of. his greatest, most awesome bankruptcy yet.

    • Who ARE these people? says:

      I wonder that you know this about Mike Pence but can’t spell his name correctly.

      Also the country is already in a dire position because the social agenda is 100% Pence and the rest is 100% corruption.

      • Kitten says:

        Exactly. Sigh. I know I sound like a broken record but FFS WE ALREADY HAVE PENCE’S POLICIES!!! Gah. He will NOT be worse than Trump. The least he would be is more of the same and the most he would be is a less-erratic, more articulate version of Trump.

      • Becks1 says:

        Plus, Pence does not have the cult of personality that Trump does. He’s so boring and dull. Yes, people will still vote for his social policies, but I don’t think he’s going to command the news cycle the way Trump does. And boring conservatives ARE beatable (see: Romney.)

  12. Clare says:

    When people say Trump is ‘un-american’’ what do you mean? How do you defined ‘american’, really? To me (and I grew up bi-racial in Georgia, so my experience is obv coloured by this) xenophobia, racism, loopholes for the rich, etc are all very ‘american’. I mean, this is a country built on the backs of African slaves, a country that had people of Japanese descent in internment camps one generation ago, a country where Filipino children were used as circus acts…no one needs me to go on…I understand America was on the right side of history during ww2, but surely that’s not all that defines american values. I mean, yes Trump didn’t win a majority of votes, but huge numbers of people CHOSE him, still support him.

    So tell me, how do we define American v un-American?

    • Becks1 says:

      @Clare – you raise good points. I don’t like using the term “American values” because to me it just reeks of McCarthyism and such, but in general when people say something “isn’t American,” my interpretation of it depends on who is saying it, ha. So if Obama says X “isn’t American,” I interpret that to mean that he thinks X “shouldn’t” be American. We “should” be better. If someone like Trump says something “isn’t American,” I assume he means its because that something isn’t typical of white upper-middle class Americans.

      But you are obviously completely correct that racism, xenophobia, laws that benefit the wealthy and hurt the poor, etc are all completely part of our culture and what makes up America.

    • Elkie says:

      So if the USA was formed to provide independence from inheritable wealth & power and taxation without representation, and Trump exists solely due to inheritable wealth & power and is all representation with no taxation, that would make him “un-American”?? Ermm.

      Or maybe all words – see: “socialism”, “morality”, “Christian” – are meaningless now…

    • adastraperaspera says:

      Americans have formed an imperfect Union, where we commit ourselves to building and maintaining a constitutional republic. That’s it. This is an ongoing project. Each generation works to improve our form of self governance. It’s our turn now. We make it what we want it to be. Monarchists, patriarchs, and tribalists have always fought to destroy us–they are fundamentally un-American.

  13. mycomment says:

    my initial reaction was to be disgusted .. but after listening to commentary, I think she’s right. there is no way the republicon controlled senate will provide the votes needed for impeachment. it’s got to be a slow roll based on the findings of the various investigations; and even then, it’s clear dotard’s supporters will be with him to the end. including the senate — those tax cuts are all that matters to them; defunding the social programs, and leaving the elderly and sick to die off. because they’re such good Christians… doncha know.

    meanwhile the endless parade of democrats announcing their intentions to run for president are providing nothing but fodder for mockery by the political media.

    it’s too late anyway. the planet burns and no government has the will to do anything meaningful to stop it. I read an article yesterday that the rivers in the Netherlands that used to be the site of an annual ice-skating trek are no longer freezing over; and ice-skating is no longer safe to do outdoors and becoming an indoor sport.

  14. Pandy says:

    Let the courts take care of him when he’s out of office. She’s right in most respects, sadly.

  15. adastraperaspera says:

    I agree with Pelosi. Trump wants a fight–Dems running at him full tilt with an impeachment lance is just what he wants. It would derail everything we’re trying to do through the committees. And take publicity from the criminal trials and indictments exposing them. I don’t think Pelosi is against impeaching him if the GOP leads the charge, though.

  16. Darla says:

    I have such mixed feelings. I know that the media is salivating at the chance to skewer dems for “overreach.” And no, we would never be able to remove him from office because the Republican senate would not allow it.

    OTOH, I agree taking impeachment off the table is normalizing this presidency. Although, I have to say I believe our glorious media has already done a fine job of that. So I don’t know.

  17. Kitten says:

    Agree that she shouldn’t take it off the table. I’m firmly Team Impeachment myself, but no way in hell am I gonna tell The Queen how to do her job.

    In Nancy I Trust,

  18. Nichole says:

    I think about my high school civics teacher saying, “checks and balances! checks and balances! “ all the time, and wonder if he was a fool, or if we used to actually have those measures in place and it recently became the shit show it is today.

  19. boredblond says:

    One of the jobs of the Congress is to be a check on the prez, and that includes impeachment, which is not a removal is to call out the prez on misdeeds. The dems may be content to wait for Mueller, but their duties are seperate and equally important. The magats will be using this as ‘if he had done anything wrong, they would’ve impeached him, so there.’ It seems every dem wants to run for prez, but if they were working more on winning the Senate we wouldn’t be having this conversation. Impeachment would bring out a lot that is now sealed, and that can only help..she’s wrong, and way too worried about upsetting voters who are never going to change. News flash, Nancy..the country is divided now.

  20. Case says:

    His remaining supporters scare me. I think impeaching him would be more dangerous than letting him finish out his term, honestly.

  21. Maylee says:

    I can see both sides of this… What if an impeachment would derail VITAL upcoming elections? My god. We all know how fickle, memory-lapsed and forgiving the American public is. It absolutely would create more division. Part of me feels like starting an impeachment would be like stepping on a burning bag of dog poo.

    What if we just did our best to vote in a democratic pres and congress – THEN amend corruption/finance/lobbying/executive power/social media regulations to prevent a disaster (trump) like this again? Solve this problem with action and change rather than a fight.

    But then as I’m writing the “plan” above I have to chuckle because yeah right will that happen. There’s a chance Democrats won’t win out in 2020, and if they do they’ll stall and hedge, they’ll vent for half an hour and then go LARPing and mogging and stroke their ****s for a while. ;)

    Where I’m falling on this now is supporting impeachment. The point isn’t to get him out of office (let the election do that hopefully) – the point is to show American people and the world that our democracy works, to regain respect for ourselves and from others, to show no one is above the law. One of the lovely other commenters here said something a while back that stuck, along the lines of ‘this is what freaking impeachment is FOR’. If not for him then WHO?? Not doing anything emboldens this corruption.

    I can’t wait to read everyone’s opinion on this – I’ve noticed this CB commenters are knowledgable, articulate, hilarious and woke af.

  22. JadedBrit says:

    The risk is that if the Orange Dysentery Stain ISN’T impeached for his multiple nefarious doings, he may be returned in the next election. And that has catastrophic implications not only for the States, but the rest of the world, my country included; be it in financial or military terms – the threat of war hanging constantly over us and the terrifying reality that that Thing has control of the Football – must be taken seriously.
    One thing I’ve noticed from this side of the Pond is that this seems to be the “freest” presidency – in terms of his untramelled power – since the days of the Founding Fathers; usually the Presidency is constrained by the DoD or Senate or advisory committees/advisors, but in Trump’s case, he appears to bypass those controls, those checks and balances that make him the most accountable citizen of citizens. How do other CBers feel re: that observation?

    • Kitten says:

      Unquestionably the most corrupt, unchecked President our country has ever seen. Mitch and the rest of the GOP will forever be remembered as thugs who abdicated their duty to the country for the sake of political power.

      GOP has become a coalition of white nationalists and corporate corruption but make no mistake, it’s been heading in this direction for decades. Trump is the symptom, not the disease.

      • JadedBrit says:

        @Kitten Thank you for your response. When would you say the rot set in and started to spread – and how could this absolute polarisation of US politics be remedied? I’m genuinely interested – as a Brit, our great divide is Brexit (again the result of a coalescence of discontent, and difficult to attribute to a single source)…

      • Kitten says:

        Well the problem is that it’s been gradual, right? So it gets difficult to pinpoint an exact moment but I would say that Nixon probably started it and Reagan perfected it. I think the first seed was planted when Lyndon B Johnson pushed the Dems to become the party of civil rights while Nixonian-era Republicans became the party of southern resentment due to what they viewed as *big government* as well as the advent of civil rights legislation.

        Reagan’s GOP was a more ideologically-driven one with a focus on free trade, free markets, small government and “trickle-down economics”. But remember that Reagan was the one who first coined the “Welfare Queen” caricature of a black woman who leeches off of the system. That racist and fundamentally-false narrative really ginned up white resentment and is still largely embraced by the Right to this day.

        Then we had the elder Bush and his son, GW both of whom still largely embraced diplomacy and trade between nations. But Trump and his supporters saw their alliances as symptomatic of “globalism” i.e. bad deals that largely hurt the country. He saw that Americans in the rust belt and elsewhere felt that they were losing their jobs to automation or being replaced by overseas labor. I think Trump seized on that resentment as well as the post-9/11 rising nationalist movement that saw Muslims, foreigners, POC…basically anyone non-white as the enemy.
        GW Bush’s foreign policy from the war in Iraq to his economic partnership with Latin America (w/ a focus on Mexico) generated so much anger among the GOP base. They thought he wasn’t doing enough for Americans and they were sick and tired of it.

        So in one sense, Trumpism is a rejection of old school Republicanism—yet you cannot separate Trumpism from the trajectory of the Republican party that was laid down by previous GOP presidents. The simmering resentment, the nationalism, the rejection of our international allies–all of it has been building for decades now. Now combine that disgruntlement with the US electing the first black president (TWICE) and we have the current incarnation of the GOP.

      • Dara says:

        May I jump in here? Like @Kitten, I agree the beginnings of what we see now started a long time ago. With Nixon, and especially Reagan. It’s not so much that the Republican policies have changed, it’s how they go about the business of getting elected and then governing once they are in office. Fear-mongering and personal attacks have become commonplace and acceptable.

        If you want a snapshot view of the evolution, look at the life and career of a man named Lee Atwater. He worked for Reagan, Bush the First, and was chair of the RNC. And he was an unmitigated bastard, using race baiting and dirty tricks to demolish opposing candidates. I suppose you can’t blame him entirely, since you need a majority of voters to fall for that special kind of BS, but that’s a much longer discussion of the state of culture and education in America.

      • JadedBrit says:

        @Kitten and @Dara – thank you both for your equally fascinating and horrifying observations re the downward trajectory of US politics. I read a lot of news and an awful lot of history, but obviously cannot really comprehend as an outsider how the rot set in: each nation has its collective consciousness/memory, I think, and thus my analyses could only be based on conjecture. Any books you could recommend on the subject?

      • Dara says:

        @JadedBrit – I have not read the entire book but Hillbilly Elegy might be one to offer insight into some of Trump’s most ardent supporters. I’m afraid I don’t know of many books chronicling recent political events, it’s been too painful even to think about let alone devote hours to reading about in unflinching detail.

    • Lightpurple says:

      He has been unchecked because Paul Ryan refused to do his job for years and Mitch McConnell hasn’t shown up to work for a decade. The likes of Lindsey Graham, Devin Nunes and Mark Meadows still refuse to read their actual job descriptions. But things are changing. Congress refused to give him his damn wall. House committees are now investigating his campaign, his finances, his business dealings, his family, and the security threats that are Nagini and Tom Riddle. His power will be checked

      • Kitten says:

        Thank goodness Dems won the House. I honestly cannot imagine where we’d be if they hadn’t.

  23. hezzer19 says:

    I’m just waiting for his Tweet saying “I’m very worth it! Impeach me! Impeach me! I’M WORTH IT! I’m more worth it than anyone!!!”

    • Lightpurple says:

      He’ll get there but today he’s simultaneously pretending that Greenpeace supports global warming and trying to shut down aviation engineers because planes were safer in 1917.

  24. Lena says:

    I agree. I remember when the Clinton impeachment backfired against the republicans big time. Voting him out is the democratic (small d) way. He’s not worth it is right.

  25. mar says:

    Impeaching will take way too much time and energy, lets just not vote for him again!

  26. Skipper says:

    I agree with Kaiser. The country is already divided thanks to Trump/Russia/GOP. Impeachment by the House would at least put Trump’s many crimes before the American people.
    Why is the House investigating Trump and his crime family? Are they planning on indicting him? Apparently no. Impeachment no.
    What is the point? Are they planning on taking action?
    Sorry, I am getting angry and disgusted. I am fed up! I am depressed. I keep thinking, stop reading the damn news. It only sends my HBP skyrocketing. I was hoping the Dems would take action, so I am disappointed. Now Trump’s budget news. More bad news. Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid cuts. 😡

  27. Raina says:

    I love this lady.
    But I’M no “lady”…
    I’D nail his fat ass to an American flag in shape of a cross. I would do everything in my power to go far left, say fukk bipartisan, get reckless and start every impeachment proceeding that I could… followed by putting my weight behind any criminal case he’s sure to drown from. I would balls to the walls with kamikaze Razor focus.
    I’d get dirtier than Trump does thinking of Ivanka.
    There would be no way out for him but the inevitable Orange jumpsuit to match his weak chinned face discoloration.
    For me: When they go high…we go so low we can see their ancestors via their breeeding hole.
    THAT is how low.
    But it’s a good low; it’s the kind that raises the people in the end.
    As my mother always said: Don’t let someone named Crystal do your taxes.
    But, she ALSO said: The best way to prove your point is not to wait and see if anyone thinks your serious.

    Just do it.