,
136 tweets,
35 min read
Read on Twitter
Everyone crowing about impeachment needs to take a hard look at themselves and examine their reasoning.
The only reason you want this is to seek vengeance against Trump.
That is not a good reason, certainly not worth losing the majority going into redistricting.
1/
The only reason you want this is to seek vengeance against Trump.
That is not a good reason, certainly not worth losing the majority going into redistricting.
1/
Mini civics lesson: Impeachment is an accusation. Removal from office is a separate process that happens in the Senate.
The Senate will not remove him. If the House passes Articles of Impeachment and is not removed, Trump will be exonerated, no matter what the truth is.
2/
The Senate will not remove him. If the House passes Articles of Impeachment and is not removed, Trump will be exonerated, no matter what the truth is.
2/
If the Senate does not remove him, Trump will claim he was vindicated. He will say the whole thing was a witch hunt.
More importantly, after Impeachment fails, everything that is uncovered in the investigation process will be off the table going into 2020.
3/
More importantly, after Impeachment fails, everything that is uncovered in the investigation process will be off the table going into 2020.
3/
If the House is impeaches, the 2020 election will be nationalized. It will be the only issue that matters. That means we can have the best candidates and be right on all the issues and it will not matter.
Democrats will be swamped.
4/
Democrats will be swamped.
4/
I saw AOC simpering for the cameras about how this "isn't about politics."
The Constitution says otherwise.
Impeachment is not a legal process adjudicated by SCOTUS, it is a political process adjudicated by Congress. This means the will of the people absolutely matters.
5/
The Constitution says otherwise.
Impeachment is not a legal process adjudicated by SCOTUS, it is a political process adjudicated by Congress. This means the will of the people absolutely matters.
5/
Right now the American public is not on our side. In fact there is *less* support for Impeachment than there was a month ago.
Some of you say that does not matter. It matters.
First of all, it means Impeaching accomplishes nothing and hurts Democrats.
6/
Some of you say that does not matter. It matters.
First of all, it means Impeaching accomplishes nothing and hurts Democrats.
6/
Some of you say Democrats are afraid. They should be. Let's talk about what they are afraid of.
Because 2020 is not a normal election year. It's not a normal Presidential election.
The stakes are much higher. We'll be dealing with the ramifications long after Trump is gone.
7/
Because 2020 is not a normal election year. It's not a normal Presidential election.
The stakes are much higher. We'll be dealing with the ramifications long after Trump is gone.
7/
2020 is a census year. Legislatures across the country will draw new legislative maps for 2022. Being in control of redistricting is critical. It is FAR more important than taking a swipe at Trump that will ultimately accomplish nothing and give him an easy reelection.
8/
8/
Anyone concerned with voter suppression and gerrymandering - and that should be EVERYONE- should understand that letting GOP control redistricting will make things worse than they are. Fewer seats will be in play at all.
Google "REDMAP" for more information.
9/
Google "REDMAP" for more information.
9/
Some of you say that isn't important. I don't understand that argument. It doesn't come from logic, or self-interest. That argument is rooted in blind rage. That is not a solid basis for making any decision, especially when the fallout is clear and undeniable.
10/
10/
Some argue the American public will change their minds if we go through the process, but no one can explain why that would be. There are currently 13 ongoing investigations into the Trump administration. The information is going to come out.
11/
11/
Labeling something an "impeachment investigation" doesn't add anything. It would actually undermine the investigations, because instead of having the findings of the House stand on their own, they will be invalidated when the Senate exonerates Trump.
12/
12/
This means ALL of those issues, everything the investigations turn up, all of our complaints against Trump will be off the table for 2020. Everything we throw at him will be countered with, "I was vindicated" and the "witch hunt" narrative will stand.
13/
13/
I see some people claiming Dems won the House back so we could impeach Trump.
This is NOT true. In fact, Nancy specifically and emphatically took impeachment off the table so our candidates could run on their own merit and talk about local issues.
That's why we won.
14/
This is NOT true. In fact, Nancy specifically and emphatically took impeachment off the table so our candidates could run on their own merit and talk about local issues.
That's why we won.
14/
Moving current investigations into Trump under the umbrella of "impeachment" does not magically give those investigations more weight. It will actually lessen their impact and allow the public to disregard them entirely bc GOP will spin the Senate verdict as a "not guilty."
15/
15/
I understand this makes you SOMAD. You feel powerless. You want to do SOMETHING. But we're already doing something. Lashing out blindly, especially considering the fallout, is counterproductive, and quite nuts.
It's insane to sacrifice the House for 10 yrs over your feels.
16/
It's insane to sacrifice the House for 10 yrs over your feels.
16/
Some of you will continue to argue that the people will come around.
There's absolutely no legit reason to think this. It's 100% wishful thinking, based on nothing substantive. Right now the people don't want it. It will hurt Dems and giving Trump another weapon against us.
17/
There's absolutely no legit reason to think this. It's 100% wishful thinking, based on nothing substantive. Right now the people don't want it. It will hurt Dems and giving Trump another weapon against us.
17/
Evidence against Trump is piling up. We're uncovering new crimes all the time. Don't we want to be able to use them against Trump? Don't we want to go into the election with the strongest case possible? If we undertake a doomed impeachment process, we can't use any of it.
18/
18/
Bottom Line:
You do not know more than Nancy Pelosi. Full stop.
Democrats are correct to fear losing legislative control over redistricting.
Calls for impeachment play well in some Districts. But not many. Let those Members say what they need to say. That's political too.
19/
You do not know more than Nancy Pelosi. Full stop.
Democrats are correct to fear losing legislative control over redistricting.
Calls for impeachment play well in some Districts. But not many. Let those Members say what they need to say. That's political too.
19/
I can see all the angry responses coming in. I'll read them, and if anyone makes a point that I haven't addressed, I will add it to the thread.
Most of the ones that have caught my eye are quite laughable.
Again, you can chalk it up to wishful thinking and nothing more.
20/
Most of the ones that have caught my eye are quite laughable.
Again, you can chalk it up to wishful thinking and nothing more.
20/
First, read this amazing thread by @TenaciousE5
It addresses most of the fallacies that y'all are holding onto re: impeachment
21/
It addresses most of the fallacies that y'all are holding onto re: impeachment
21/
And here's another important thread addressing common misconceptions about impeachment from @J_P_BoomerDog
22/
22/
Twitter "celebs" can DEMAND that Nancy bend to their will. Pounding the table makes you feel good and look tough, but righteous indignation changes nothing.
Nancy will decide to impeach when and if the time is right, not you.
Now is not the time.
23/
Nancy will decide to impeach when and if the time is right, not you.
Now is not the time.
23/
🤣🙄 
It's actually not about the law at all. Impeachment is 100% political. The House can impeach for jaywalking if the will of the people is behind them.
If it's about law, you want a criminal proceeding.
(As for "condescending," you understood me perfectly)
If it's about law, you want a criminal proceeding.
(As for "condescending," you understood me perfectly)
How would calling it "impeachment" change anything you said?
And it is not a "requirement" - it is an OPTION.
There are far better options.
And it is not a "requirement" - it is an OPTION.
There are far better options.
How are we "ignoring" anything? There are 13 investigations right now and more to come.
Those are pretty words, very nice rhetoric, but it's meaningless.
None of that is as important as controlling redistricting.
None of that is as important as controlling redistricting.
Fair enough. And if Nancy determines the will of the people is behind us, she will impeach. But not before.
You may not like it, but this has always been true. That's why only two Presidents have been impeached, and neither was convicted by the Senate.
P.S. Again, the law doesn't matter. Constitutionally, Impeachment is a political process, not a legal one.
P.S. Again, the law doesn't matter. Constitutionally, Impeachment is a political process, not a legal one.
What makes you think they would be televised? What makes you think calling it impeachment would make people care any more than they do now?
This.
"Peace of Mind" is still about your feels.
If we impeach and it fails (which it will), he will definitely be reelected.
Using the word "impeachment" changes nothing you address here
If these issues are truly important to you, you should want Democrats in charge.
We aren't "doing nothing"
There are currently 13 ongoing investigations. Calling it "impeachment" only undermines those and any future investigations.
There are currently 13 ongoing investigations. Calling it "impeachment" only undermines those and any future investigations.
This.
IDK how "impeachment" = "real knowledge"
And IDK why you think they would be televised. And if they were, it would be during the day, not prime time.
And IDK why you think they would be televised. And if they were, it would be during the day, not prime time.
Saying this completely ignores the investigations that are already underway.
I don't understand what you mean.
We would definitely be dealing with the fallout from impeachment for the next 10 years. If GOP controls redistricting this time, it's over for us.
We would definitely be dealing with the fallout from impeachment for the next 10 years. If GOP controls redistricting this time, it's over for us.
There are already hearings, almost every day.
Why would they be taken more seriously? When Trump is found Not Guilty, they will be taken *less* seriously.
GOP took a HUGE hit in 1998. They might not have lost the House, but you have to consider what a huge majority they had before, and that midterms usually work in the favor of the party not in the WH.
And, Florida aside, they lost the popular vote in 2000
And, Florida aside, they lost the popular vote in 2000
Well said.
This. We all want Trump held accountable. Going off half-cocked is not the way to do it. A "not guilty" verdict will do the opposite.
"High crimes and misdemeanors" is not defined in the Constitution. There is no legal "threshold." It is up to Congress to decide. Congress can impeach for jaywalking if the will of the people is behind them.
This. Let's try him in a court of law.
A failed impeachment, or a not guilty verdict, won't change this.
This.
95% of the objections to this thread boil down to: "You're wrong because I want you to be wrong."
You're right. But I have an answer. Then, we lose the election, we lose legislative majority, gerrymandering gets worse, and Republicans will be even stronger after 2022.
This.
I'm not sure what you mean. A successful impeachment Constitutionally leads to a trial in the Senate.
Impeachment won't compel him to leave. Only the Senate can do that. And they won't.
Impeachment won't compel him to leave. Only the Senate can do that. And they won't.
No, but we have a dictionary. "Impeachment" is an accusation, not a verdict.
Right. Politically, most Democrats won't be able to, either. They answer to their voters, and only their voters.
All the evidence in the world won't matter when he's found Not Guilty. But without that verdict, it's fair game.
Impeaching Clinton was a political decision. And it backfired terribly on Republicans.
Why? What's the difference?
A "Not Guilty" will make him bulletproof.
A "Not Guilty" will make him bulletproof.
If it was about the law, the Constitution would give the power of removal to SCOTUS.
And again, a "Not Guilty" tells the public he did not break the law, even though he did.
And again, a "Not Guilty" tells the public he did not break the law, even though he did.
This. And that "authority" doesn't even exist.
???????????????????????
Fear of losing legislative control going into redistricting is very real, and far more important than vengeance.
Everything else you said is just your opinion, based on nothing but how you feel.
Everything else you said is just your opinion, based on nothing but how you feel.
This.
Not everybody. And that verdict roiled the country.
And neither OJ nor the jurors in that case had to stand for reelection.
And neither OJ nor the jurors in that case had to stand for reelection.
What makes you think we'd get the camera and the mic? That's a decision that would be based on ratings potential.
More on the fallout from Clinton's impeachment. She's right - Florida and 9/11 saved the GOP.
I don't see how a failed impeachment changes this.
This makes no sense. If we don't get a conviction, he is exonerated in the eyes of the people.
And I see this "GOP will have no choice" a lot, but that makes no sense either. They answer to their voters.
And I see this "GOP will have no choice" a lot, but that makes no sense either. They answer to their voters.
This.
There is no reason to think this. "Impeachment" isn't a magic word.
Right. And when it does, Nancy will impeach. But not before.
If it's about "loving America" why on earth would you want to put GOP in charge of redistricting?
This.
If the public doesn't think he broke the law, and that opinion is bolstered by a Not Guilty verdict, the answer is "indefinitely"
We are already holding hearings. The information is getting out there.
Another excellent point. Pence would be worse than Trump bc he would work seamlessly with Congress. Trump's incompetence and complete lack of interest in policy are the only reason we've had a fighting chance. And it's hard to beat an incumbent President.
It would fail if there aren't enough votes in the House. Right now there are not. And it definitely fails if the Senate exonerates Trump. If you are saying 20 Republicans will vote to remove him, you are not arguing in good faith.
Where to start with this one?
First, you can't decouple House impeachment from Senate trial, and when he is exonerated, that's what history will say.
And I don't understand why everyone doesn't fear losing control over redistricting. I want them afraid.
First, you can't decouple House impeachment from Senate trial, and when he is exonerated, that's what history will say.
And I don't understand why everyone doesn't fear losing control over redistricting. I want them afraid.
This argument makes no sense to me. His crimes are already being "aired to the public" and if he's exonerated, we can't use them against him.
And you're right, it's not a "moral obligation." That's my argument. We have to be smart about it.
And you're right, it's not a "moral obligation." That's my argument. We have to be smart about it.
Nothing is being ignored. There are currently 13 ongoing investigations.
There is no evidence to support anything you say here. What tarnished Clinton's legacy was the affair itself, not the bullshit impeachment it led to. And it did tremendous harm to GOP.
Impeachment is not a "duty" it is an option.
If and when the public wants it, Nancy will impeach. But not before.
Nice rhetoric, but you can't compare today's GOP even with GOP from 20 years ago, much less from the 70's. And impeachment will have no bearing on whether the elections are fair.
I know you don't want to hear it, but that's reality as it stands now.
Constitutionally, Impeachment isn't about the law. It's political.
Constitutionally, Impeachment isn't about the law. It's political.
No one has taken it off the table. When the will of the people is behind us, Nancy will impeach. But not before.
This. Again, there are already 13 ongoing investigations with more to come. A failed impeachment would undermine the findings of those investigations.
And if were all about "Democrats you know" we would be having a completely different conversation. But it's about ALL Democrats, and independents, and moderates, and Republicans.
No, because I don't even understand your point. Nothing changes just because you label something "impeachment"
Great mini-thread here:
This. If you want Nancy to impeach, lobby your OWN Member of Congress. That's the only one who answers to you.
A "Not Guilty" verdict is the opposite of justice.
Why is it all or nothing?
Watergate "worked" because GOP forced Nixon to resign. That's not going to happen this time.
That is completely different. Impeachment wouldn't "die" it would lead to a full exoneration of Trump and GOP.
Nobody ever won an election because they believed the best about their voters.
This.
This.
This.
I'm not "guessing" anything. If the will of the public moves far enough in our direction, Nancy will impeach. But not before.
This.
And we are already doing something. The fact that it isn't "working" is an argument against impeaching, not for it.
And we are already doing something. The fact that it isn't "working" is an argument against impeaching, not for it.
I am spooked about what would happen re: redistricting. Everyone should be. Redistricting is more important than spanking Trump.
It's about risk assessment. Impeachment is a huge risk with no reward.
Constitutionally, impeachment is not a "duty" it is an option.
In case it isn't crystal clear, the following is my position as well.
Call it what you want, but I have yet to see an argument for "Impeachment Now" that's based on pragmatism or any kind of logic.
Sadly, this.
Then why are you making it about your feelings?
How is letting the Senate exonerate Trump good for democracy?
What I forgot to say in the thread is that there's the very real possibility that the votes in the House are not there. It would be suicide for impeachment to fail in the House before it even gets to the Senate.
So why hand him a Not Guilty verdict on a silver platter?
More info on the impeachment process
Trump is dying for Democrats to impeach him, because he knows it would work in his favor.
If nothing else, this should matter.
If nothing else, this should matter.
"Political calculus" = concerns about redistricting
That is far more important than a doomed impeachment.
That is far more important than a doomed impeachment.
This. And many neutral/non-partisan observers would agree.
An asterisk, or any other symbolism or rhetoric, is not more important that the very real consequences of having GOP control redistricting
Trump is banking on Democrats going off half cocked and giving him an easy victory when he is exonerated.
Which makes this even trickier, and it's even more important to get it right
Fair questions.
1) Putting investigations under the umbrella of impeachment doesn't give them any extra weight or power
2) Nixon resigned after SCOTUS ruled against him and his own party forced him out, not because hearings weren't going his way.
1) Putting investigations under the umbrella of impeachment doesn't give them any extra weight or power
2) Nixon resigned after SCOTUS ruled against him and his own party forced him out, not because hearings weren't going his way.
(cont)
3) Obvs it's not cut and dried but in a scenario where Trump is empowered by a failed impeachment, Dems up and down the ballot will suffer.
3) Obvs it's not cut and dried but in a scenario where Trump is empowered by a failed impeachment, Dems up and down the ballot will suffer.
No, this is what will happen when the Senate finds him Not Guilty.
More on Watergate
If you're pinning your hopes on 20 GOP Senators bucking their party and their own constituents, there really isn't any more to discuss. You aren't arguing in good faith. It's not going to happen.
A toothless impeachment that ends up exonerating Trump is not "punching him in the nose." It's handing him your own gun to use against you.
And we aren't being passive, far from it. There are 13 ongoing investigations already.
And we aren't being passive, far from it. There are 13 ongoing investigations already.
Impeaching Trump and having the Senate exonerate him isn't going to make anyone "go" it will help them stay and gain seats.
And the American public is firmly against impeachment at the moment
And the American public is firmly against impeachment at the moment
The Constitution specifically makes impeachment a political process adjudicated by Congress, not a legal one adjudicated by SCOTUS. The will of the people has to be with us.
So yes, we are making political calculations, as outlined by the Constitution.
So yes, we are making political calculations, as outlined by the Constitution.
There is nothing in the Constitution that mandates impeachment or defines any threshold.
I'd like to point out that after Nancy's meeting this morning, AOC has changed her tune. She looked quite chastened on her way out, and was even dodging cameras and mics, which is not like her at all.
We need the will of the people. Right now we do not have it.
This.
Right. People who wouldn't suffer under a more powerful GOP have the luxury of discounting the importance of redistricting.
An offense is only "impeachable" if Congress decides it is. There's no threshold specified. Congress can impeach for jaywalking if they think the will of the people is behind them.
They seem to think calling it "impeachment" bestows some kind of magical powers. It does not.
We aren't doing nothing. There are already 13 ongoing investigations with more to come.
