,
11 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
This seemed to be the purpose of the statement.
Mueller's 's given everything Congress needs to start impeachment proceedings if it so chooses. He couldn't have been clearer. There's certainly enough to investigate impeachment based on Trump's obstruction in the report itself.
Mueller's 's given everything Congress needs to start impeachment proceedings if it so chooses. He couldn't have been clearer. There's certainly enough to investigate impeachment based on Trump's obstruction in the report itself.
Initially I understood Speaker Pelosi's point that an impeachment inquiry against the President would be pointless if the Senate would not consider impeaching and if public opinion strongly against it. But I now believe it is the constitutional duty of Congress to investigate /1
Mueller report has strong evidence Trump obstructed justice, and this is an impeachable offense. Members of Congress take an oath to uphold Constitution and it is their constitutional duty to determine if Trump's conduct merits impeachment, regardless of political consequences /2
Of course, the President should not be impeached if Members of Congress conclude Trump did not do the things listed in the report or if Members conclude that the obstruction was not serious enough to merit impeachment. Perhaps censure is in order. /3
But with DOJ/Mueller taking the position that indicting the president for crimes is off the table, an impeachment inquiry is the only way the American people will know that Trump's potential crimes have been fully investigated and appropriate punishment considered. /4
That's pretty much what Mueller was saying in his primary press conference: Russia interfered in our election. Trump obstructed that investigation. Mueller's office could have said Trump didn't commit a crime, but did not reach that conclusion. The ball is in Congress's court. /5
No one knows if a fairly done impeachment inquiry will hurt Democrats politically. No one knows if failing to seriously pursue an impeachment inquiry will hurt Democrats more. So it makes sense to do what is constitutionally required. /6
After all, it is not as though Pelosi is saying she doesn't believe Trump obstructed justice or that these are not serious enough charges to merit impeachment. It seems a pure political calculation, which is arguably a dereliction of Congress's responsibility to investigate. /7
If the House impeaches Trump though a FAIR PROCESS based on strong evidence of obstructing justice, let the American people watch Mitch McConnell run a sham Senate trial and let Republican Senators vote against conviction in the face of that evidence. /8
Sure that's a political risk for Democrats, but so is doing nothing. More importantly, it's the right thing to do as a matter of constitutional responsibility. 9/9
expanding on these thoughts in a piece posting to @slate in a few minutes
