,
15 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
I want to break down the impeachment debate and the problems I have with both sides. I will be stating numbers; I will not be citing them. They are from my memory. If you have more accurate ones to show me wrong, be as brutal as you like in the comments correcting me. 1/15
The pro impeachment side seems to be that congress has a duty to the nation regardless of what Republicans will do, that to do otherwise lets Trump get away with it, that the constitution requires it, that you shouldn’t hold off prosecution just because you can’t secure a 2/15
conviction, and impeachment is the best way to get the details before the public . Congress doesn’t have a duty- the constitution only says that’s how you can impeach a president, not that congress has to do it. Duty is for customs at the border- the only duty 3/15
democrats need show is to winning. That is how they do it, that is how we should do it. The details are already in front of everyone, even hearings wouldn’t add anything. The average sound bite now is 8 seconds, in 1974 it was 42, the Watergate hearings were in prime 4/15
time, there is no way to disseminate that kind of information from one centralized source anymore. Even impeachment wouldn’t get it in front of everyone. There are just too many outlets. The ethical rules state a prosecutor can only bring a case where he has a 5/15
reasonable belief there will be a conviction. It could be argued that cases are not brought all the time when a conviction is unlikely, and even prohibited if realistically impossible, even in a mob case like this. 6/15
The anti-impeachment side centers mostly on this idea that he would almost certainly be acquitted. That if he is acquitted it will galvanize the Republican base and give Trump the election based on his claims of vindication and because the Republicans lost seats in 1998, 7/15
beating Trump in 2020 has to be our only focus, and we have nothing else after we shoot our one shot. First, we came up with a plan to save the ACA, why is no one out with a plan to secure a conviction? Surely there has to be a way to convince 20 republican senators, even 8/15
if we throw out extortion and (redacted). Second, Trump already claimed vindication, and polling shows a majority of Americans didn’t believe him when he said it to start, when Barr said it before the report came out, and now. Maybe the public is more savvy than we give 9/15
them credit for? As for Bill Clinton, remember that before the impeachment occurred, 2/3 were against it; that number remained afterward, and the public’s disapproval of it led to the Republican losses in the midterms. Before the Mueller report came out polling was at 10/15
50/50 on impeachment; I don’t know what it is now. Make all the arguments about galvanizing the Republicans you want, impeachment cost seats in 1998 because it was unpopular in a way that it is not now. Also, what about Democrats? This environment is radically different 11/15
than in 1998, it could galvanize the democrats who think we have no balls, and it could drive them away if we do nothing. I think he short answer is if there is an impeachment and an acquittal it is impossible to say how the general electorate will act. As for the 12/15
2020 election, I am not about to trust the voters to pee correctly. We have done that, we saw where it got us in 2016. No one should ever “trust the voters” on anything ever again. As for “what happens after we shoot our only shot,” in theory at least 13/15
(I know Pelosi wouldn’t), we could impeach him again for all the new crimes he commits during the trial, since his behavior won’t change, plus for his emoluments clause violations, his presidential records act violations, and his being a security risk. 14/15
Final thought? Nobody can really say what will happen if we do, and what will happen if we don’t, which is why we have to (redacted). (Fin)
