Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Some judge needs to shut this circus down soon.

The worst democrat is better than the best republican.

If a good thing happens for a bad reason, it’s still a good thing.

There are no moderate republicans – only extremists and cowards.

Pelosi: “He either is stupid, or he thinks the rest of us are.” Why not both?

Let’s delete this post and never speak of this again.

… gradually, and then suddenly.

Let there be snark.

Balloon Juice has never been a refuge for the linguistically delicate.

GOP baffled that ‘we don’t care if you die’ is not a winning slogan.

I’m more Christian than these people and I’m an atheist.

Anyone who bans teaching American history has no right to shape America’s future.

Of course you can have champagne before noon. That’s why orange juice was invented.

It’s not hopeless, and we’re not helpless.

The line between political reporting and fan fiction continues to blur.

Jesus, Mary, & Joseph how is that election even close?

Republican speaker of the house Mike Johnson is the bland and smiling face of evil.

I’d try pessimism, but it probably wouldn’t work.

Republicans firmly believe having an abortion is a very personal, very private decision between a woman and J.D. Vance.

We need to vote them all out and restore sane Democratic government.

“Just close your eyes and kiss the girl and go where the tilt-a-whirl takes you.” ~OzarkHillbilly

Every one of the “Roberts Six” lied to get on the court.

“The defense has a certain level of trust in defendant that the government does not.”

The gop is a fucking disgrace.

You are here: Home / Politics / Domestic Politics / Impeaching the Motherfucker?

Impeaching the Motherfucker?

by | 127 Comments

This post is in: , ,

According an op-ed in Le Post by Joshua Matz, it has begun:

Has the House of Representatives opened an impeachment inquiry? That question is starkly presented by a petition that the House Judiciary Committee filed in federal court on Friday. It is also answered by that petition. No matter what certain House Democratic leaders might say about the politics of the matter, there can now be no doubt that the committee is engaged an investigation of whether to impeach President Trump.

Through its petition, the committee seeks access to portions of the report by former special counsel Robert S. Mueller III that were redacted to protect grand jury secrecy. The committee also seeks grand jury testimony bearing on Trump’s knowledge of criminal acts, Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and Russian connections to his campaign. Finally, the committee seeks grand jury testimony about actions taken by former White House counsel Donald McGahn; this last request probably anticipates the committee’s rumored plans to seek an order compelling McGahn to testify…

At the level of political rhetoric, the House, and especially Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), has sent plenty of mixed messages. But when we look at what the House has done — and at what the Judiciary Committee is doing — the message is clear: An impeachment investigation has begun. Where these proceedings will go remains one of the most hotly disputed questions in American politics. There is no denying, however, that they are impeachment proceedings — and that the House is therefore entitled to the evidence it needs to answer the weighty questions before it.

This can’t be right. I just read in Politico that Trump had his best week ever.

Reader Interactions

127Comments

  1. 1.

    Fair Economist

    “Are they – aren’t they” would be an interesting tactic to keep the inquiries in the news.

  5. 5.

    zhena gogolia

    But the front page of WaPo and NYT told me that Dems are more split than ever after the failure of the Mueller hearings!

  6. 6.

    MattF

    You may mock them, but they’re doing it:

    “Impeachment isn’t a binary thing that you either are or you aren’t. What we’ve been saying and what we’ve been doing is starting a process where we’re engaging in an investigation to see if we should recommend articles of impeachment.”

    — Rep. Mary Gay Scanlon (D-Pa.) on July 26, 2019, regarding President Trump

  7. 7.

    The Moar You Know

    I look forward to much squalling from the idiots and IRA trolls as they insist in spite of all evidence, Nancy is going to abandon all of us to die at the hands of the Trump administration.

    What is needed will be done, but on her timetable. Not on that of a bunch of “internet experts” who’ve never actually spoken to a politician, never mind worked with one.

    “Are they – aren’t they” would be an interesting tactic to keep the inquiries in the news.

    @Fair Economist: Which is what they’ve been doing for almost two years now. And will continue to do so.

    The goal is self-evident – don’t throw it to the Senate, keep it in the House and just keep dripping out the sordid facts all the way through Election Day. Trump’s going to get the Hillary treatment. I’d love to ask how he likes it but he’s too stupid to even know it is happening.

  8. 8.

    rikyrah

    50 years….

    I feel old…..

    The Brady Bunch cast REUNITE as the sitcom celebrates its 50th Anniversary… after joining forces to restore the show’s iconic $1.8m house
    By LAURA FOX FOR MAILONLINE

    PUBLISHED: 02:16 EDT, 26 July 2019 | UPDATED: 08:44 EDT, 26 July 2019

    The Brady Bunch cast have reunited ahead of the iconic sitcom’s 50th Anniversary, as they promoted the TV special A Very Brady Renovation on Thursday.

    The six actors who played the children of the blended family took to the stage at the Television Critics Association Summer Press Tour for a panel to promote the series which sees them renovate the Studio City home that appeared heavily in the show.

  9. 9.

    sdhays

    @Fair Economist: This is why I get a little frustrated with the people bitching about getting our impeachment on now, NOw, NOW! If there was a chance that the Senate could remove the ASSet before November 2020, then that would be a valid posture – time is of the essence. But there is not 1 patriotic Republican in the Senate, let alone 20, so the target cannot be having a trial in the Senate. The target has to be making Trump’s treason and corruption central to the 2020 elections and tying that around the necks of Congressional Republicans. So drip, drip, drip what’s the House going to do now over the next 12-15 months is much more effective.

    Trump and Republicans usually drive the news cycle, but with this, the Democrats have the ability to step on their ability to do that. It’s not a weapon you want to expend quickly.

  10. 10.

    rikyrah

    Just investigate. Totally agree with Silverman to consolidate it all under the umbrella of one ‘special’ committee….

    I believe that Ted Lieu should be on it..he’s good on tv, stays on topic, is fearless, and is good on social media.

  12. 12.

    sdhays

    @rikyrah: I hope that they roll that out in the fall. Not only is it a good investigative approach, it builds the drama as the Democrats “take another important step” towards impeaching the President*.

    ETA: Schiff would be another good choice.

  13. 13.

    Another Scott

    Here’s the legal filing (53 page .pdf) from the Judiciary Twitter feed:

    Because Department of Justice policies will not allow prosecution of a sitting President,
    the United States House of Representatives is the only institution of the Federal Government that
    can now hold President Trump accountable for these actions. To do so, the House must have
    access to all the relevant facts and consider whether to exercise its full Article I powers, including
    a constitutional power of the utmost gravity—approval of articles of impeachment.

    That duty falls in the first instance to the House Committee on the Judiciary (the Judiciary
    Committee or the Committee). As Chairman Nadler recently wrote in a Memorandum issued to
    all Members of the Committee, “[w]ith regard to the Committee’s responsibility to determine
    whether to recommend articles of impeachment against the President, articles of impeachment
    have already been introduced in this Congress and referred to the Judiciary Committee. They are
    under consideration as part of the Committee’s investigation, although no final determination has
    been made. In addition, the Committee has the authority to recommend its own articles of impeachment for consideration by the full House of Representatives.” Jerrold Nadler, Chairman,
    H. Comm. on the Judiciary, Memorandum Re: Hearing on “Lessons from the Mueller Report, Part
    III: ‘Constitutional Processes for Addressing Presidential Misconduct,’” at 3 (July 11, 2019) (July
    11 Memorandum) (attached as Ex. A to Declaration of Perry H. Apelbaum). As Chairman Nadler
    further explained, “[t]he Committee seeks key documentary evidence and intends to conduct
    hearings with [former White House Counsel Don] McGahn and other critical witnesses testifying
    to determine whether the Committee should recommend articles of impeachment against the
    President or any other Article I remedies, and if so, in what form.” Id.

    To meaningfully consider whether to exercise this authority—as well as to exercise its
    other pressing legislative and oversight responsibilities—the Committee must obtain evidence and
    testimony in a timely manner. In particular, the Committee has sought access to the full contents
    of the Mueller Report, and it now seeks this Court’s permission to access those portions that the
    Department of Justice has redacted pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e).

    Good, good.

    (Sorry about any wonky formatting.)

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  14. 14.

    The Moar You Know

    I believe that Ted Lieu should be on it..he’s good on tv, stays on topic, is fearless, and is good on social media.

    @rikyrah: Absolutely, and Nadler as well.

  15. 15.

    Baud

    I hope the House called Trump a motherfucker in its petition so the NYT wouldn’t find it too boring.

  17. 17.

    low-tech cyclist

    @sdhays:

    @Fair Economist: This is why I get a little frustrated with the people bitching about getting our impeachment on now, NOw, NOW!

    I suspect I’m far from the only one who wanted the impeachment inquiry to start now, now, NOW! – because to do it right was going to take time. It’s not the sort of thing you want to rush through.

    Because I’m still uncomfortable with the notion of impeachment proceedings dragging on into next year’s primary season, I’d have been a lot happier if the official inquiry had opened right on the heels of the Mueller Report being made public back in April. Right now we’d be midway through a 5-6 month inquiry, working towards drafting and debating articles of impeachment in the Judiciary Committee in October, and in the full House in November.

    The way things look now, the inquiry will start after Labor Day, and will finish up sometime early next year probably. I’m not really crazy about that sort of timing, but it’s better to do that than to not impeach at all.

  18. 18.

    Damien

    I think we’re all forgetting who Politico knows this is really benefitting:

    This is great news for John McCain

  19. 19.

    trollhattan

    @Fair Economist: @rikyrah:
    “‘Are they or aren’t they?’ Brought to you by ‘Cats’ the motion picture, coming to theaters this fall.”

    Needs more Beyonce tie-in but I think it’s an effective shiny thing.

  20. 20.

    low-tech cyclist

    @Another Scott: Cleaning up the formatting for readability:

    Because Department of Justice policies will not allow prosecution of a sitting President, the United States House of Representatives is the only institution of the Federal Government that can now hold President Trump accountable for these actions. To do so, the House must have access to all the relevant facts and consider whether to exercise its full Article I powers, including a constitutional power of the utmost gravity—approval of articles of impeachment.

    That duty falls in the first instance to the House Committee on the Judiciary (the Judiciary Committee or the Committee). As Chairman Nadler recently wrote in a Memorandum issued to all Members of the Committee, “[w]ith regard to the Committee’s responsibility to determine whether to recommend articles of impeachment against the President, articles of impeachment have already been introduced in this Congress and referred to the Judiciary Committee. They are under consideration as part of the Committee’s investigation, although no final determination has been made. In addition, the Committee has the authority to recommend its own articles of impeachment for consideration by the full House of Representatives.” Jerrold Nadler, Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, Memorandum Re: Hearing on “Lessons from the Mueller Report, Part III: ‘Constitutional Processes for Addressing Presidential Misconduct,’” at 3 (July 11, 2019) (July 11 Memorandum) (attached as Ex. A to Declaration of Perry H. Apelbaum). As Chairman Nadler further explained, “[t]he Committee seeks key documentary evidence and intends to conduct hearings with [former White House Counsel Don] McGahn and other critical witnesses testifying to determine whether the Committee should recommend articles of impeachment against the President or any other Article I remedies, and if so, in what form.” Id.

    To meaningfully consider whether to exercise this authority—as well as to exercise its other pressing legislative and oversight responsibilities—the Committee must obtain evidence and testimony in a timely manner. In particular, the Committee has sought access to the full contents of the Mueller Report, and it now seeks this Court’s permission to access those portions that the Department of Justice has redacted pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e).

  22. 22.

    sdhays

    @low-tech cyclist: I’m the opposite – I think debating articles of impeachment in 2019 would be a disaster. I don’t want to give McConnell the time to rush an acquittal and have most of a year to say “case closed”. The public has a very short term memory. There’s a reason the Republicans are very careful not to engage in government shutdowns and debt limit brinkmanship just before an election – with enough time, the public will forgive and forget. I want the Senate conducting a trial in summer 2020 at the earliest.

  23. 23.

    MattF

    @Damien: And Hugh Hewitt (no link) assures us that the tide has turned, and Trump will now go on the offensive. Apart from the odd notion that Trump hasn’t really been attacking anyone lately— this may not turn out the way Hugh thinks it will.

  24. 24.

    trollhattan

    @UncleEbeneezer:
    Wish my kid were able to see that–she’s down there right now for a futbol tournament. History in the making, plus she just finished “The New Jim Crow” as part of her summer reading for school.

  26. 26.

    Kay

    Andrew Yang
    @AndrewYang
    I would like to signal to the press that I will be attacking Michael Bennet at next week’s debate. Sorry
    @MichaelBennet
    but you know what you did.

  29. 29.

    sdhays

    @Kay: He had better deliver or Chuck Todd will pout about not getting his promised entertainment.

  30. 30.

    mad citizen

    Investigate with extreme prejudice.

    That is all. Off to listen to/watch the Claypool/Lennon Delirium and the Flaming Lips.

  33. 33.

    Fair Economist

    @Kay: Looks like somebody wants to imitate Senator Harris. With a much less significant target, though.

  34. 34.

    Another Scott

    @PJ: Harris rose dramatically in the polls after going after (“attacking”) Biden.

    HTH.

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  36. 36.

    Roger Moore

    This can’t be right. I just read in Politico that Trump had his best week ever.

    Of course he has! This is just proof that by starting an impeachment inquiry, the Democrats have fallen into his trap!

  38. 38.

    Kay

    @PJ:

    I think Booker and Gillibrand are setting up attacks. Probably others- I don’t follow all of them. It’s fine- it’s allowed. They’re permitted to try to win. I hope Gillibrand doesn’t insist they all denounce Franken again. I like her better than I expected to but that’s not increasing.
    I like her whole suite of “family” programs. I think they would be popular. Joe Biden should steal them! Good fit for him, right?

  40. 40.

    mrmoshpotato

    @Damien:

    This is great news for John McCain

    Without a doubt!

    Wait. Doesn’t he have a daughter named Meghan?

  41. 41.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @PJ: @Another Scott: and Cory Booker is broadcasting his intention to take a swing at Biden over the 90s crime bill, and Biden broadcast his to swing back at Booker’s record in Newark.

    Meanwhile, the Wilmer campaign is declaring that anything less than single payer is fealty to the insurance industry.

  42. 42.

    Mike in NC

    In a better country a career criminal like Donald Trump would have been tossed into prison 20 years ago.

  43. 43.

    Betty Cracker

    @Kay: I’m certain the moderators will try to instigate a Biden-Harris scuffle because drama. It would be great if neither took the bait. Is that too much to hope for, do you think?

  44. 44.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @Kay: and this, according to twitter, is a shot at Elizabeth Warren, though I don’t get it, not even a little

    Shane Goldmacher @ ShaneGoldmacher
    Kirsten Gillibrand in Iowa: “We have Democratic candidates running for president right now who do not believe necessarily that it’s a good idea that women work outside the home”

    Who exactly?

    She won’t say.

  46. 46.

    My Side of Town

    Dems should never give the GOP/Nazis an opportunity to provide a verdict on impeachment. Let the voters decide.

  47. 47.

    hells littlest angel

    This is the right way to do it: impeach the motherfucker reluctantly.

  50. 50.

    Emerald

    @low-tech cyclist: But Low-Tech, we’ve used those five months (and actually longer) to get the court proceedings going. Those should bear fruit at just about the right time.

    The Dems know what they’re doing, despite appearances. As Nancy SMASH said, “Make no mistake, we know exactly what path we’re on. We know exactly what actions we need to take. And while that may take more time than some people want it to take, I respect their impatience.”

  51. 51.

    Formerly disgruntled in Oregon

    @Betty Cracker: I guarantee you that whatever Harris does, it will 100% intentional. Kamala’s not falling for any “bait”.

  52. 52.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    to steal almost everybody’s twitter joke: What terrible optics for Democrats!

    Talking Points Memo @ TPM
    3 GOP Representatives Have Dropped Reelection Bids This Week Alone

    There’s a TX R whose district includes parts of metro Houston that people say might be in play. The latest is Martha Roby from Alabama, who IIRC barely survived a trumpist primary challenge b/c she spoke out about the Access Hollywood tape and famously asked Hillary Clinton if she was alone when she got the 3 a.m. Benghazi phone call, and got flustered when the room started laughing at her. I don’t know the third.

  54. 54.

    Betty Cracker

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: Maybe it’s to do with Warren’s book, “The Two-Income Trap”? If so, the assertion is either completely dishonest or based on not comprehending the point of the book.

  55. 55.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    @Betty Cracker: I never understood why people thought Gillibrand was presidential material, but I figured people who saw her close up saw something I didn’t. Her campaign has made me think I was overestimating her.

    And it’s not about THAT TOPIC. I think her stance on sexual harassment issues is clear, brave and long-standing. But then to turn around whine about the consequences of that stance, in this instance, takes some of the shine off.

  56. 56.

    Another Scott

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: Twitter is horrible for getting the whole story.

    IowaStartingLine has the whole speech (or most of it).

    […]

    Gillibrand told a group of women gathered for a week-long conference of female union members in Iowa City Thursday night she’s sick of her fellow Democrats turning a blind eye to sexual assault and sexual harassment.

    “I’ve got to tell you, I’m really sick of it. I’m so freaking sick of it. I can’t tell you how angry I am that Democrats, Democrats turn a blind eye to sexual assault, sexual harassment and any reforms that value women in the workplace,” Gillibrand said. “And they play lip service to women and to women voters, but I promise you, every time the door of a negotiating room closes, women’s reproductive freedom, women’s rights, women’s equality is the first thing that’s thrown out the window to create a compromise, and that is compromise by Democrats and Republicans, both sides of the aisle in Congress.”

    She then turned that to a question of which presidential candidate would best actually represent women in office.

    “My question to all of you as women, who do you want in the White House?” Gillibrand asked. “Do you want a woman who values you? Do you want a woman who will go to the mat for you every time? Not compromise on your women’s reproductive freedom? Not compromise on your worker’s rights? Not compromise on your ability to go to the workplace and not be sexually harassed?”

    And Gillibrand brought up unnamed fellow competitors for the White House as insufficiently supportive of women.

    “We have Democratic candidates running for president right now who do not believe necessarily that it’s a good idea that women work outside the home,” she said. “No joke. We have presidential candidates running right now who think the Me Too movement has gone too far. What do you mean by that? Do you mean any woman who has come forward to say she has been sexually harassed or sexually assaulted shouldn’t be complaining?”

    “What are you saying?” Gillibrand continued. “That any man, especially a powerful man, a well-liked man should be able to grope you in the ass or grope you in the boob or forcibly kiss you? Is that what you believe? We have people who are running for president of the United States as Democrats who believe the standards for the Democratic Party are too high. Really? How would you feel if your child was groped, anywhere on their body? How would you feel if somebody you know and love is forcibly kissed without their consent? I don’t think it would be ok then.”

    She finished by asking the female union members who they trust.

    “Let me ask you, as women of labor, in one of the biggest most male-dominated industries in the world, let me ask you, who do you want in the Oval Office when that door closes?” Gillibrand asked. “Do you want a champion who has been fierce for women’s rights for over a decade? Or someone who is just getting to the table today? Or maybe someone who will yes you to death and say they believe in women’s rights but really don’t give a shit? Your choice. I’m telling you, I’m the best candidate running for president. I’m the best candidate for you and your voice.”

    Gillibrand’s answer came in response to a question about how the senator would try to change the national culture after Donald Trump and create safe workplaces for women. Gillibrand also lamented the number of sexual assaults that still occur in the military and on college campuses, and she mentioned her legislative efforts to fix it.

    Presumably she’s talking about Biden (Anita Hill, handsy, etc.).

    [eta} – Could be Wilmer too, he had issues with MeToo.

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  64. 64.

    Another Scott

    God has some helpful advice:

    God @TheTweetOfGod

    People, instead of focusing on your differences, focus on what you have in common, like the tendency to focus on your differences.

    1:33 PM – 26 Jul 2019

    rofl.

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  66. 66.

    SFAW

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    Meanwhile, the Wilmer campaign is declaring that anything less than single payer is fealty to the insurance industry.

    Well, on the plus side, at least it get them off the “the primaries wuz rigged!” bullshit.

    Just kidding — they’re still whining about that, too.

  68. 68.

    James E Powell

    @rikyrah:

    I believe that Ted Lieu should be on it..he’s good on tv, stays on topic, is fearless, and is good on social media.

    I want to see Maxine Waters bringing the fire.

  69. 69.

    Kay

    @Betty Cracker:

    Ugh. Jake Tapper. I can’t even think about it.

    Town halls are worse though. I love the long incredibly complex 4-parters about an individual health insurance question. I would be so bad at it. “Am I your health insurance representative? I don’t think so. Oh, okay, let me see the policy”
    Heavy sigh.

    One of my sisters wants me to run for Congress so I can attack farmers. That’s my stump speech. “Let me tell you about farmers. So called”.

  73. 73.

    Omnes Omnibus

    @Another Scott: I am by no means a Biden Stan, but I do find it interesting that people who talk about Biden and women talk about Anita Hill, but they seldom mention that he shepherded VAWA through the senate.

  78. 78.

    Enhanced Voting Techniques

    I think the everyone should reflect on the Judge Mc Rapey Crybaby Drunk Fratboi hearings as it shows the pattern how things are done now; the Repug’s win the news cycle for the day with their outrage machine, the pundits scream “Dems POWNED” but once the dust settled and people think it threw it, it turns into another Repug set back. You can already see the narrative about the Muller testimony starting to morph. This is just going to be a slow process with the Democrats having to pause for the emotional outburst to die down every step of the way.

  80. 80.

    H.E.Wolf

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    Talking Points Memo @ TPM
    3 GOP Representatives Have Dropped Reelection Bids This Week Alone

    Here are their names and districts:
    Martha Roby, AL-02
    Pete Olson, TX-22
    Paul Mitchell, MI-10

    H/T to the folks who type faster than I do. :-)

  81. 81.

    UncleEbeneezer

    @?BillinGlendaleCA: Jesus (pun intended), I didn’t even know that despite working with a lot of their people for the past 2 years. They are about to become a Sanctuary Space for undocumented people in fear of detainment/deportation by ICE. They really do good deeds.

  82. 82.

    Another Scott

    @Omnes Omnibus: He’s got critics about that legislation too.

    (I don’t know enough about it to have an opinion.)

    To be clear, I think Gillibrand was too clever by half in going after other unnamed Democrats in her otherwise good speech/statement. She should be clear about who she’s accusing if she wants to make accusations (maybe she’ll do so at the debate).

    I also hope that we don’t end up in a situation where all the politicians with years or decades of experience, who have demonstrated that they can make tough calls, take tough votes, and even compromise to pass needed legislation, etc., don’t end up making themselves unelectable and we end up with a pig in a poke. :-/

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  84. 84.

    James E Powell

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    I never understood why people thought Gillibrand was presidential material, but I figured people who saw her close up saw something I didn’t. Her campaign has made me think I was overestimating her.

    In the immediate aftermath of the 2016 debacle, there were no obvious or consensus next gen Democrats so the press/media created a few in order to have someone to write about. Gillibrand is in New York, press/media is in New York, so there you go.

    The same press/media did the same thing after Romney lost to Obama. They named Marco Effing Rubio as the Republican Savior. Not a name to watch, not a future maybe, but Savior! There was never anything about Rubio that indicated he could be or would be president, but when the press/media create something, they tend to keep it alive. It’s like Paul Ryan, the smart policy wonk who only cares about the deficit and debt. A complete fabrication that is still regarded as unassailable truth in the press/media.

  85. 85.

    Fair Economist

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: I thought Gillibrand was going to be a top candidate and one of my top preferences. She has a good set of policy stances and was able to shift from representing a very blue doggy House district to a very liberal state without political trouble. That’s deft. Plus, she looks good on TV. But, she hasn’t caught on. C’est la vie, I figure, with so many top tier candidates. If she does manage to catch on and get nominated somehow I’d be quite happy to support her.

  86. 86.

    sdhays

    @James E Powell: I hadn’t put those two things together, but that’s really insightful. Gillibrand isn’t the Democratic Rubio, but I think you’re right about the dynamic which boosted both beyond their actual appeal/abilities.

  87. 87.

    Hildebrand

    Starting an inquiry without saying that that is exactly what you are doing is brilliant, because then Trump won’t think it’s happening. He is so literal about this kind of thing. So, keep it chugging along, keep doling out subpoenas, but don’t call it an impeachment inquiry until late in the game. I love this!

  88. 88.

    Fair Economist

    @H.E.Wolf: Roby and Mitchell are from deep red districts. They are not the kind you’d expect to retire 16 months out. Roby is fairly young too (Mitchell is a reasonable age to retire.) I wonder if there’s something going on where they see some hammer descending.

  90. 90.

    Miss Bianca

    @Omnes Omnibus: Yeah, I am far from all in on Biden, myself, but he’s a hell of a lot better qualified than almost everyone else on that stage, and I am personally entering “JESUS, just let the voters decide already” territory.

  94. 94.

    JoeyJoeJoe

    @H.E.Wolf:

    Olson has Tom DeLay’s old seat, and it’s been moving towards the Democrats. Beto barely lost it in the senate race and Olson himself almost lost. In the past, Republicans would win it by at least 20 points or so. Roby’s Seat is heavily republican, but Democrats actually won it in 2008 with Obama’s voters coming out. Mitchell’s seat is Macomb County Michigan and has become the most Republican in the state. David Bonior used to represent the district.

  96. 96.

    mrmoshpotato

    @Jay: Oh it was the falsehoods that was a bridge too far to continue his role in this Nazi regime. That’s so cute.

  97. 97.

    trollhattan

    @?BillinGlendaleCA:
    A college roommate grew up a couple blocks from Stately Wayne Manor, which he took me past during my first Pasadena visit. Wish I would have had a “POW!” cutout.

  99. 99.

    TenguPhule

    @Another Scott:

    What do you mean by that? Do you mean any woman who has come forward to say she has been sexually harassed or sexually assaulted shouldn’t be complaining?”

    “What are you saying?” Gillibrand continued. “That any man, especially a powerful man, a well-liked man should be able to grope you in the ass or grope you in the boob or forcibly kiss you? Is that what you believe?

    Gillibrand: “So let’s just lynch the bastard without a trial! Death first, Regrets later!”

    And she wonders why she’s polling with dust mites.

  101. 101.

    Jay

    Terry is doing his book tour for his book about “taking a stand” (he didn’t) about Charlottesville all around the world, except not in Charlottesville. Here’s what Terry’s administration actually did: https://t.co/2ciAwcPpd6— Emily of the State (@EmilyGorcenski) July 26, 2019

    Full thread worth reading,…….

  102. 102.

    Tom Q

    @Enhanced Voting Techniques: The first impulse of the Beltway media, from Reagan’s election onward, is to assume the GOP position is strengthened by anything that happens. “This is excellent news for John McCain” is so funny because it’s so representative.

    I’m afraid this’ll be true until Dems win a couple of consecutive elections in Roosevelt-style blowouts. Even then, the ownership preference for GOP economics will try to steer the conversation in a “no one really wants to go too left” direction.

  104. 104.

    Fair Economist

    @JoeyJoeJoe: Obama did *not* win Roby’s district in 2008, and Trump won her district by 30(!) points in 2016. Hard to imagine a swing taking her out. Maybe she was afraid of the primary.

  106. 106.

    Bill Arnold

    @Baud:

    I hope the House called Trump a motherfucker in its petition so the NYT wouldn’t find it too boring.

    Have to say that Mueller occasionally sorta looked like he wished he had a rifle on his desk rather than a copy of the report, when he was being hectored by Republican questioners. Probably against House rules, alas.
    Could have just been deeply annoyed, though.

  108. 108.

    Ruckus

    @rikyrah:
    OTOH it might be best to have several different investigations going. You never know where each one might lead, what might be made public. Impeachment is after all a figurative dead end until the senate changes hands so why take it there, investigate, investigate, investigate, drip by drip by drip. And a number of Trump’s cronies might be taken down one by one. Decrease his abilities, even as limited as he makes them on his own.
    It’s politics about power and the criminal actually holds that right now. Change that power structure and he actually will hold a lot less. In warfare you seldom charge head first into/against the odds, it rarely works. Yes sometimes it does but if you are low on supplies, the weather is against you, you have no big deal to employ, you win by a thousand cuts, not one frontal attack. If we learned anything from the war of my generation, Vietnam, it is that even overwhelming odds can be beaten. With tactics, not shear power.

  109. 109.

    TenguPhule

    @Jay: Every so-called “victim” except the entitled wart complaining about Franken touching her waist during a photo she requested was a fucking Republican. One of those “victims” was caught lying about Franken touching her because he was at a different event (with his wife!) at the time she claimed the incident occurred. And that “Democratic Staffer” has never been proven to actually be that, it was all “we believe her” when TO THIS DAY we still do not know who that nameless accuser actually is.

  111. 111.

    Jay

    A pro-Trump Republican candidate for Congress who is aiming to unseat Ilhan Omar in Minnesota has been charged with a felony after allegedly stealing from stores.

    Danielle Stella was arrested twice this year in Minneapolis suburbs over allegations that she shoplifted items worth more than $2,300 from a Target and goods valued at $40 from a grocery store. She said she denied the allegations.

    Stella, a 31-year-old special education teacher, was reported this week to be a supporter of the baseless “QAnon” conspiracy theory about Donald Trump battling a global cabal of elite liberal paedophiles.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jul/25/danielle-stella-republican-ilhan-omar-charged-felony-qanon-trump

  112. 112.

    Jay

    @TenguPhule:

    As the review of the Jane Mayer “argument” shows, she either got played, or is desperately selling bullshit.

    And given her alleged reporter creds, it ain’t #1.

  113. 113.

    SFAW

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    Although I can think of quite a few reasons to denounce Frankenstein.

    Why? Just because Colin Clive was a ham? “It’s alive! It’s Alive!!! It’s ALIVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”

    Apropos of nothing in particular: I’m pleased that I can’t still remember that “Fritz” was played by Dwight Frye. Considering I have a tough time remembering my own name some days, that’s reassuring.

  114. 114.

    zhena gogolia

    @SFAW:

    Dwight Frye was the best.

    Colin Clive is quite good in some films. One More River. Journey’s End.

  118. 118.

    JoeyJoeJoe

    @Fair Economist: I had meant that a Democrat won the House seat, not Obama himself; he lost 63-36 I think. I do think that without Obama’s voters coming out, the Republican nominee would have won

  119. 119.

    Felanius Kootea

    @UncleEbeneezer: If only it wasn’t on a Monday :(. Thanks for posting that. I have to start going to All Saints again – have been only once since Ed Bacon retired and Mike Kinman became Rector. It’s the only church I can stomach in the LA area but driving there from close to the ocean is a major pain.

  121. 121.

    J R in WV

    @rikyrah:

    I believe that Ted Lieu should be on it [the impeachment committee]..he’s good on tv, stays on topic, is fearless, and is good on social media.

    Also Adam Schiff and Katy Porter, former prosecutor and law professor.

  122. 122.

    SFAW

    @zhena gogolia:

    Dwight Frye was the best.

    Apparently, he also played “Renfield” in Dracula. If I ever knew that, I had forgotten it, and only (re-)found out when I was making sure I was right about Fritz.

  123. 123.

    hotshoe

    Now if only we can get rid of the 5 Supremes who have collectively decided to crown the Orange King and destroy any remnant of hope for three-equal-branches govt.

    None of those five are morally qualified to be the nation’s highest judges. Malevolent democracy-destroying men in black.

  125. 125.

    the Conster

    IMPEACHMENT DOESN’T REMOVE HIM, ONLY THE ELECTION WILL STOP HIM AND REMOVE HIM AND GET THE BABIES OUT OF CAGES.

  126. 126.

    E

    Can someone actually point to anything Biden said as it relates to the Anita Hill hearings. I’ve watched a lot of it and I still haven’t found one inappropriate or offensive thing he said. Not to mention he voted against Clarence Thomas and got the Violence Against Women Act Passed.

  127. 127.

    Jason Consolidation

    @The Moar You Know: I don’t think it’s actually self-evident that it doesn’t reach the Senate. There is potentially really explosive stuff in the information the Dems are waiting for. Impeachment built around the case they have today would brand Trump a criminal. Impeachment built around the case they’re trying to build would brand him as illegitimate and a traitor and not only might that change a few minds in the Senate, but it might send Trump off the deep end. I think he’s comfortable being accused of obstruction of justice. He is incredibly insecure about challenges to his legitimacy.

Comments are closed.