,
9 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
People read my threads and think I'm saying, "Let's not impeach."
Let me be clear.
I am saying: Impeaching before the Democrats have all the evidence would be stupid.
(I consider "Stupid" to be harsh language 😉)
Also, perhaps people who like democracy . . .
Let me be clear.
I am saying: Impeaching before the Democrats have all the evidence would be stupid.
(I consider "Stupid" to be harsh language 😉)
Also, perhaps people who like democracy . . .
. . . might reconsider slamming the Democrats.
American democracy is fragile right now.
When something is fragile, you don't batter it more. Unless you want it to break.
The side right now trying to uphold norms are the Democrats.
See:
American democracy is fragile right now.
When something is fragile, you don't batter it more. Unless you want it to break.
The side right now trying to uphold norms are the Democrats.
See:
Correct. I shouldn't have used the word "all"
I'm thinking about the big stuff.
For example, evidence that Trump has been propped up by Russian money. Evidence that Trump would be a poor man without Russian money.
I'm thinking about the big stuff.
For example, evidence that Trump has been propped up by Russian money. Evidence that Trump would be a poor man without Russian money.
I tend to agree with this.
Or supposeTrump's loans were co-signed by a Russian oligarch.
What is Trump working so hard to hide?
Maybe he's just jerking everyone around.
Or maybe there's something so explosive that we can get him out of office.
Or supposeTrump's loans were co-signed by a Russian oligarch.
What is Trump working so hard to hide?
Maybe he's just jerking everyone around.
Or maybe there's something so explosive that we can get him out of office.
I am not denying that Trump has committed serious, impeachable offenses.
I'm saying if you impeach right now with what we know, the Senate will acquit, and Trump will be emboldened and more dangerous.
Better to see if there is evidence . . .
I'm saying if you impeach right now with what we know, the Senate will acquit, and Trump will be emboldened and more dangerous.
Better to see if there is evidence . . .
. . . that even people like McConnell and Doug Collins can't stomach.
I suspect it's there.
Impeach now and it's all over.
Why not wait until the House finishes the investigation, and then impeach?
I suspect it's there.
Impeach now and it's all over.
Why not wait until the House finishes the investigation, and then impeach?
What's the harm in waiting until the investigation is complete?
What's the harm in getting the Grand Jury testimony, and the financial stuff from the bank, and the taxes (NY will have them soon).
The value is more of the evidence becomes public.
Then impeach.
What's the harm in getting the Grand Jury testimony, and the financial stuff from the bank, and the taxes (NY will have them soon).
The value is more of the evidence becomes public.
Then impeach.
Yes.
I have bad news for everyone. There is no instant relief.
Reality check: Even IF enough evidence comes to light so the GOP dumps Trump, you won't thrilled with President Pence.
Actual relief will only come after a blue sweep in 2020.
I have bad news for everyone. There is no instant relief.
Reality check: Even IF enough evidence comes to light so the GOP dumps Trump, you won't thrilled with President Pence.
Actual relief will only come after a blue sweep in 2020.
Once more: Impeaching Trump now doesn't remove him from office.
It doesn't stop bad behavior.
Impeaching Trump after more evidence is gathered at least means a shot at removing him from office.
It also means more evidence is uncovered and made public.
It doesn't stop bad behavior.
Impeaching Trump after more evidence is gathered at least means a shot at removing him from office.
It also means more evidence is uncovered and made public.
