Home | About | Donate

Nancy Pelose's Anti-Impeachment Stance Makes Increasingly Less Sense With Each Passing Day

Originally published at http://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/06/25/nancy-peloses-anti-impeachment-stance-makes-increasingly-less-sense-each-passing

1 Like

Unless there is some sort of grand master plan in the works that the Dims are going to spring on the GOP in the middle of next years election cycle, Nancy’s plan is horrible at best, and criminal at worst.
And every day the democrats permit this delay, delay, delay GOP game plan to play out, the less likely they will be to indict anybody. GOP operatives have spent every day since the midterm elections covering their tracks and burning up paper shredders.
It appears that Nancy and Tom Perez’s plan is to win the White House back, hope they can win the senate, and let the trumpsters walk away scot free, just like they did with the Bush war criminals in 2009


Impeach Nancy!


Pelosi’s behavior is noxious, and makes it perfectly clear that even if the Dims hold all three branches of government, the neo-libs will stand in the way of any progressive policies. They are not interested in good governance, only in power. Failure to begin impeachment proceedings against Trump is, IMO, at least as heinous and corrupt as Trump’s behavior.


One of the problems with impeaching Trump is that much of the process is deemed to be dependent on Mueller’s report and his findings. And Mueller is both unreliable and dishonest: he is among the last persons on the planet to insist that the Kremlin, in conjunction with Wikileaks hacked the DNC and, inter alia, handed Trump the election. And that is a tissue of nonsenses, promulgated by the most corrupt elements in public life including the deep state and neo-liberal democrats. Genuine democrats and believers in reform should eschew any association with the Clintonites and those behind Mueller.
It would be much easier and much more effective for the Democrats to impeach Pompeo or Bolton. But that is a problem: Pelosi and half of the Democratic caucus is just as tightly bound to Netanyahu and the neocons as Trump is, perhaps more so.


Pelosi, Schumer and the whole neoliberal party core are actually more afraid of upsetting their comfortable status quo than they are in beating Trump. If they actually managed to get a Democrat in the White House, they might have to do the hard work of getting something done. As long as the corporate money keeps coming in, easier to masquerade as an opposition party, now and then. Pays the same.


Seems to me that this makes Pelosi the equal of O’Connell, blocking issues/votes –

Speaker Pelosi’s continued refusal to allow the House to open impeachment proceedings against President Trump is becoming increasingly incoherent. And her continued assertion that her decision is not about politics is becoming downright unbelievable.

How is it credible to claim, as Pelosi has, that Trump has committed crimes serious enough to put him in jail, but not serious enough to commence the Constitution’s main remedy for addressing Presidential wrongdoing: impeachment?

Pelosi’s stance is transparently political. The only coherent reason for this is that she fears the politics of impeachment, not the process – and therein lies the rub.

Pelosi is a corporatist taking money from the same offenders/corporations that Trump
is working for –


Mueller is now said to be testifying before Congress on July 17th …
in response to Congressional actions to demand his appearance.

We have to keep the SPOTLIGHT on corporate money $$$$$ and
anyone taking it.

Media should be reporting every day how much $$$$ the candidates are
taking and from whom –

I’d like to see C-span doing this as well whenever a politician appears on
their network –


What you mean-um “appear”, Kemo Sabé?

P’Loser and her co-conspirator O’Bummer have been blatantly weak and unprincipled for at least a decade — or have you forgotten who let the War Criminals and Banksters off the hook in 2009 with
their “Looking Forward – Not Back” bullshit??


Disclaimer: I’m not American. I’m a Kiwi who grew up in England. I’m probably well to the left of just about all Americans, but so is the Overton window here in Aotearoa, and I’m well left of that.

I think all these sincerely well meant calls for impeachment are naive. Yes, you want justice. The whole world wants justice, but the fact of the matter is that impeachment IS a POLITICAL process, and the jury that will decide his fate is a RIGGED jury. Justice will not be served this side of the election. Of course I understand the outrageous injustice of it, the sense that there is now a moral duty to impeach. I can feel it, too. But what if impeachment fails? Don’t we also have a moral duty to ensure that Trump doesn’t win a second term?

When those GOP senators acquit him, and you know they will, then all the federal investigations will stop, too. Dirty Donny will start over, a year out from the election, WITH A CLEAN SLATE. A year to persuade enough voters that he was right, that it was all a witch hunt, after all. I can see it now - “NO COLLUSION! TOTALLY ACQUITTED! NO OBSTRUCTION,UNLIKE CROOKED HILLARY!” etc etc. And because impeachment resulted in acquittal there will be no way to argue. That’s the effect of an acquittal; it pretty much ends the argument.

I don’t care how much you may hate Pelosi, she showed both fortitude and judgement over the Christmas time shutdown. I think you should consider the possibility that she is showing the same here. Delaying the process may be angering people, but not to the extent of making them switch to Trump. In fact building up the anger levels in her own party may well help progressives win primaries. If Pelosi and the corporate Dems are energising your base you should be making hay, getting your own selected in primary contests.

So while impeachment is definitely still coming, you really don’t want it to come too soon. My bet is Pelosi is doing her darnedest to try and arrange things so that the House vote on impeachment comes just a little too late for the Senate to hold the trial before the election. That way Dumpster Donny has impeachment hanging over his head during the election and the public still have the evidence against him fresh in their minds when they cast their votes.

However, I think it’s far too early to push Pelosi into premature action. If the senate acquits against the run of the evidence, there will be anger. If that’s this year, the Repugnants have got most of next year to defuse that anger. So it’s better that, if that is going to happen, it happens as near to the election as possible.

Now many are starting to say that impeachment is a moral issue and that Pelosi has a duty to move to impeachment straight away. Sorry, but impeachment is ALWAYS a political issue, and yes she has a duty to make it as effective as she can. It’s a political issue because the Congress is a political institution. In fact, one of the reasons you’re in this mess is because Democrats were afraid of playing political hardball. If she believes that impeachment will fail to go through the senate, then her political duty becomes to give the Democratic presidential candidate the best chance of beating Trump, and Democratic candidates, in general, improved chances of success. The best chance of doing this is to have all these matters coming to a head in about a year’s time rather than before Christmas.

Pelosi is treating this as a political issue because it IS. Don’t let your mistrust of corporate Democrats push you into naive stances. If it still looks like stonewalling at the next State of the Union, then you should be shouting from the rooftops. In the meantime, remember she tied Trump up in a neat little parcel, stamped, franked and posted him to himself, all without breaking sweat, only five months ago.


Well said and I wholeheartedly agree. However I still don’t like or trust Pelosi…


The point isn’t to pass a Bill of Impeachment to the Senate (which, as you point out, is utterly corrupt and would never convict Tweetle-Dumb), but to begin public Impeachment Hearings that would give
the House additional powers to both investigate Executive corruption and to bring their findings to the attention of a majority of voters prior to the 2020 elections.

In addition to welcoming – if not actively assisting – Russia’s interference in the 2016 election and then obstructing the investigation thereof, Trump has also committed numerous violations of the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution.  For P’Loser to continue to impede in-depth investigations by the appropriate House committees is a shameful dereliction of her duty as a sworn member of Congress to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States.


“Pelosi’s stance is transparently political. The only coherent reason for this is that she fears the politics of impeachment, not the process – and therein lies the rub.”

I can think of other reasons. Number one being that impeachment proceedings will broaden the scope of the investigation and entangle many democrats, most likely including Pelosi.

It’s in the very nature of politics that you cannot trust any politician, completely. However, unless you think Pelosi is in cahoots with the GOP, you need to cut her some slack. She’s a very experienced political operator and, as an outsider, I can see several reasons to make haste slowly, but only one in favour of moving to impeach immediately.
Before Trump had his tantrum and shut your government down I’d barely heard of Pelosi, but her handling of that crisis was a political masterclass.

Please bear in mind that the worst thing the Dems could do now is give the GOP senators the chance to say “Not guilty” a whole year out from the election. If the senators vote against overwhelming evidence of wrongdoing there will be a backlash against them, but a year is too long to keep that anger stoked.
Make the bastards decide guilt or innocence this time next year or even a little later and you’ll see two benefits. First, people will have it all fresh in their minds when they vote in November and second, there’s a better chance to turn a few vulnerable senators, who are more likely to de-couple from Donny Dumpster.

What is/are the specific high crime(s) & misdemeanor on which Trump is to be impeached? Don’t just cite the Mueller report: give me a specific example.
Don’t get me wrong: Trump is an horrific president, engaging in criminal conduct, for example, attacking Syria based on what now looks like a false flag chemical attack, and without Congressional declaration of war. Problem is, Obama, Bush Jr. and Clinton all engaged in similarly illegal conduct, with impunity.
The impeachment case has to be serious (not technicality or process crime) and unique to Trump (ie other presidents didn’t set a precedent).
The bankruptcy of RussiaGate charges weighs on any accusations the Dems make against Trump. They have a great burden to provide credible evidence of at least one serious crime in order to tenably introduce impeachment proceedings.

Uncle Fester,
“…shameful dereliction of her duty as a sworn member…”

Simple question. Do you want the Senate to declare Trump not guilty a year before the election, or would you rather they’re making that choice, say, July ‘20?
If the vote is obviously counter to the run of evidence there would be a backlash, more against the senate than Trump, but it’s unlikely to last for long. Further argument on the substantive issues would be stymied, so Trump would have a free ride into the election.
As I intimated in a previous post, politically the best possible outcome would be an impeachment vote just too late for the senate to try the case this side of the election. That may not be possible, in which case the case needs to be dragged out as long as possible.
The “shameful dereliction of duty” would be if Pelosi took the only shot she will get and missed.

Apparently you didn’t read my response very closely.  I do NOT, repeat NOT, recommend that the House vote to pass a Bill of Impeachment along to the Senate.  I DO recommend that the House committees responsible for further INVESTIGATIONS into impeachable “High Crimes & Misdemean­ors”, including  a) possible conspiracies between Trump’s campaign and the Russians,  b) Trump’s ob­struction of the investigations thereof, and  c) Trump’s numerous and blatant violations of the Emolu­ments Clause of the Constitution of the United States   be allowed to proceed, rather than being held
up by the obviously senile and sold-out-to-big-business Speaker of the House, Nancy P’Loser.

1 Like

I do apologise, Uncle Fester. I misread your first sentence as “The point IS…”