Posted on 06/03/2019 2:33:21 AM PDT by SMGFan
She’s deliberate, even cautious. Democrats are lucky to have her
OPINION — If anyone understands how badly a perfectly good impeachment can go, it’s Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
Pelosi was in the House chamber on Dec. 19, 1998, when the House voted to impeach President Bill Clinton. Less remembered is the moment earlier in the day when speaker-designate Bob Livingston, Republicans’ choice to succeed Newt Gingrich after a disastrous midterm election performance, shocked his caucus and announced on the floor that he, too, would resign from the House after Hustler magazine threatened it would go public with his numerous extramarital affairs.
In the end, the 1998 march to impeachment cost Republicans two House speakers and one midterm election — and the Senate still failed to convict the president on the articles the House advanced. And that was when all sides, including Clinton, agreed on the facts at hand — that Clinton had lied to prosecutors about having had an affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky.
It’s no wonder that Pelosi is taking a deliberate, even cautious approach. Here are five reasons why she’s wise not to rush into impeaching President Donald Trump, no matter how much progressive Democrats want to do it:
1. The Starr report was an open door and a tank of gas to impeach Clinton. The Mueller report is just an open door.
2. The Senate votes aren’t there yet.
3. It’s not (really) bipartisan.
4. 2020 looms.
5. You can’t unring the bell of opening an impeachment inquiry.
(Excerpt) Read more at rollcall.com ...
Reason #6 -
“We got nothing, dammit!!”
Correction: The ball-less Senate Republicans led by Chester "Henry, you're not going to dump this garbage on us" Lott failed to even conduct a trial.
The fake impeachment is designed to make Pelosi the first female President. Don’t kid yourself. If President Trump is removed, VP Pence won’t even get sworn in.
I agree with you, and got attacked by some moron on here a while back for making that same statement.
The point isn't whether Bill Clinton would have been convicted, but that not even conducting a proper trial made a complete mockery of what the House did.
Democrats - for whom the Bell Tolls.
“Do we want the Democrats to go forward with their partisan plans of impeachment which Chuck Schumer will not push in the Senate? “
The only reason the rats want to go there is to hang the word impeachment around Trump’s neck. They know they have no case. They actually want to use Flynn’s lie to Pence and the President waiting two days to fire Flynn as the reason to impeach, saying Flynn was compromised by the Russian’s and this “could” have led to blackmail.
This article is a smokescreen for what the democrats are planning to do. The democrats in the house, under Nancy Pelosi, are marking time until the time is right relative to the November 2020 election. They intend to proceed with an impeachment which will pass the house, but then it will collapse in the Senate and they know it. The reasoning is that the accusations will be fresh in the minds of voters in the election. The democrats are simply trying for a propaganda advantage from an impeachment try.
I’m not sure there are enough votes in the House. Remember there are a significant number of new democrats who are from conservative districts that went to Trump. A vote for impeachment would surely make many to be a one-term representative and I think Nancy is aware of this. A vote for impeachment that fails in the House would be a devastating defeat for democrats and likely would demoralize democratic voters heading into the 2020 election...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.