• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Why is Pelosi continuing to hold onto the articles of impeachment?

FreedomGate

Mental Gymnastics 🥇Gold Medalist🥇
Oct 10, 2018
2,586
1,432
585
www.kickstarter.com
New polls show declining approval for the impeachment, other polls show their own party is confused, and additional polls show that Trumps approval rating is rising.

I may be missing something, so help me out if I am, but there doesn't seem to be any benefit for Pelosi or her party to waste time and continue to delay the articles instead of submitting them to congress. The Senate has the ability to start at anytime even without the articles in hand, and the optics would be in their favor if they decide to do so.

So I guess what I'm asking is, is there a strategy here? Because everything seems to be falling apart. Did Pelosi mention why she is holding the articles in a TV interview somewhere? I'm just trying to make sense of this, because so far it doesn't make much sense at all.
 

JORMBO

Darkness no more
Mar 5, 2009
8,132
7,142
1,470
I think she was trying to sway public opinion in her favor by saying the Senate is corrupt and wouldn't run a fair trial. She was then going to use that to make demands on how the trial is to be run. But she doesn't really have any power over the Senate so this is most likely going to continue to make her look bad the longer she holds on to them. Especially since she said this needed to be completed urgently since Trump is an immediate threat.

I don't think she wanted to go forward with impeachment from the beginning, but the crazies pushed her into it. She is normally smart politically, but doesn't really seem to have had a good strategy throughout this whole process. Who knows what she is trying to accomplish at this point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cryptoadam

FreedomGate

Mental Gymnastics 🥇Gold Medalist🥇
Oct 10, 2018
2,586
1,432
585
www.kickstarter.com
I think she was trying to sway public opinion in her favor by saying the Senate is corrupt and wouldn't run a fair trial. She was then going to use that to make demands on how the trial is to be run. But she doesn't really have any power over the Senate so this is most likely going to continue to make her look bad the longer she holds on to them. Especially since she said this needed to be completed urgently since Trump is an immediate threat.

I don't think she wanted to go forward with impeachment from the beginning, but the crazies pushed her into it. She is normally smart politically, but doesn't really seem to have had a good strategy throughout this whole process. Who knows what she is trying to accomplish at this point.
Wasn't it confirmed she had started planning for Impeachment 2 years ago?
 

Weiji

Member
Jul 20, 2018
669
817
365
I think she was trying to sway public opinion in her favor by saying the Senate is corrupt and wouldn't run a fair trial. She was then going to use that to make demands on how the trial is to be run. But she doesn't really have any power over the Senate so this is most likely going to continue to make her look bad the longer she holds on to them. Especially since she said this needed to be completed urgently since Trump is an immediate threat.

I don't think she wanted to go forward with impeachment from the beginning, but the crazies pushed her into it. She is normally smart politically, but doesn't really seem to have had a good strategy throughout this whole process. Who knows what she is trying to accomplish at this point.
They felt they needed a win against trump and in their over zealousness to get one they’ve injured themselves.

It seems pretty clear this gambit has not helped them win the presidency, and if it causes them to lose the house it’s going to be a disaster of epic proportions.

Can you imagine what Trump could do with 2+ years of a republican majority in Congress?

California might lose statehood, lmao.
 

Super Mario

Mario Mario
Nov 12, 2016
1,801
2,205
545
The whole thing never really had a path forward to begin with. Why should it make any sense at this point?
 
  • Like
Reactions: pramod

Sybb

Member
Nov 11, 2019
150
277
245
I don't think the democratic leadership wanted to impeach Trump at all, but a lot of democratic voters in New York and California demanded it. The pressure got too high, I think.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cryptoadam

cryptoadam

... and he cannot lie
Feb 21, 2018
9,012
11,568
955
Abuse of power and quid pro quo. Ironic thats what they are pushing on Trump.

Pelosi is abusing her power as speaker trying to overstep the constitution and take a giant shit on it by controlling the Senate and up turning the impeachment process. Once the articles are done the House has no more power according to the constitution but for Pelosi and the Dems they can't handle being powerless. So they are being power hungry trying to exert their control on the Senate.

The quid pro quo is the attempt to extort the Senate into setting the rules the House wants. The withholding of the articles is meant to try and make Senate Republicans look bad, thus having a political benefit in 2020 in both the GE and the Senate elections. They want to score political benefit by claiming the Senate did not act in good faith to get voters.

Seems clear cut to me an abuse of power with extortion, bribery and quid pro quo. But ya know rules for thee not for me.
 
Mar 18, 2018
2,271
1,799
385
She is interfering with our electoral process on several levels. Doing exactly what they claimed Russia did and tried to pin on Trump. Just like Facebook and YouTube are doing now.

The longer she waits the more likelihood of keeping Democratic Senators hung up in a trial and Trump bump in media closer to the election. Ol Joe, Bloomberg of HRC can swoop in and be the DNC nominee.

At some point I wish people would just drink the koolaide already and get their suicide pact over with. Enough is enough with this charade.
 

infinitys_7th

Gold Member
Oct 1, 2006
6,259
7,705
1,575


This seems to be Evelyn Farkas in Burisma jacket. This all runs deep. [I say seems to be because that is what is being said by many, though i am not 100% it is her]
Just doing a quick Google, Farkas appears in media with the same earrings and necklace. It's almost certainly her. Just more evidence of the Obama administration being connected to the right kind of Ukrainian corruption.
 

Cybrwzrd

Anime waifu panty shots are basically the same thing as paintings of the french baroque masters, if you think about it.
Sep 29, 2014
6,252
9,121
910
Just doing a quick Google, Farkas appears in media with the same earrings and necklace. It's almost certainly her. Just more evidence of the Obama administration being connected to the right kind of Ukrainian corruption.
I mean, why wouldn’t she be at a Burisma event? She is a “Nonresident Senior Fellow” on the Atlantic Council. Burisma is also a major donor to the Atlantic Council.
 

infinitys_7th

Gold Member
Oct 1, 2006
6,259
7,705
1,575
I mean, why wouldn’t she be at a Burisma event? She is a “Nonresident Senior Fellow” on the Atlantic Council. Burisma is also a major donor to the Atlantic Council.
Thanks for the pointer. The guy next to her is John Herbst, who is apparently one of the people running damage control for Biden and who runs the Eurasian Atlantic Council:


It's strange how all these people defending Biden are all connected to Burisma.
 

NickFire

Member
Mar 12, 2014
6,394
5,789
800
I think its now obvious that she's going to transmit them a couple hours before the state of the union address.
 

cryptoadam

... and he cannot lie
Feb 21, 2018
9,012
11,568
955
Look the whole country of Ukraine was corrupt, and in its infinite wisdom the Obama administration decided to become the piggy bank for them. Billions went to Ukraine while Dem operatives all got nice cushy jobs in the Ukraine. It wasn't just Hunter, Obama and Joe sent tons of people over there to "help" them out.

Meanwhile the guy they backed in 2016 is voted out due to corruption losing to a late night comedy host. Thats how sick the country was of the guy that Obama and Joe backed and gave the blank check too that they voted in a guy who tells jokes.
 

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
19,832
40,343
1,290
USA
dunpachi.com
Look the whole country of Ukraine was corrupt, and in its infinite wisdom the Obama administration decided to become the piggy bank for them. Billions went to Ukraine while Dem operatives all got nice cushy jobs in the Ukraine. It wasn't just Hunter, Obama and Joe sent tons of people over there to "help" them out.

Meanwhile the guy they backed in 2016 is voted out due to corruption losing to a late night comedy host. Thats how sick the country was of the guy that Obama and Joe backed and gave the blank check too that they voted in a guy who tells jokes.
In the eyes of a Democrat, Ukraine is a case of Schrodinger's Corruption.

When Democrats are involved, everything was above-board. All the conspicuous hires and fires were above board. Furthermore, they were all working together to get rid of corruption. All the Ukrainians who worked with Democrats were committed to justice and transparency. The notion that Trump would need to investigate corruption in Ukraine just doesn't match what we know about the upstanding Ukrainian gov't during that time period.

Yet when Trump is involved, Ukraine is a hotbed of corruption, helping Trump subvert the American political system (with a side-helping of Russian interference™).
 

Cucked SoyBoy

Member
Dec 18, 2018
586
887
325
Pelosi is hoping the Senate will flip Democrat in November. Then she can send over the articles and really get rid of Trump (if he even wins re-election with this hanging over him).

If she sent over the articles now, the Senate would not convict Trump, so then Trump could swing into "I've been vindicated!" mode and have something good to campaign on.
 

cryptoadam

... and he cannot lie
Feb 21, 2018
9,012
11,568
955
In the eyes of a Democrat, Ukraine is a case of Schrodinger's Corruption.

When Democrats are involved, everything was above-board. All the conspicuous hires and fires were above board. Furthermore, they were all working together to get rid of corruption. All the Ukrainians who worked with Democrats were committed to justice and transparency. The notion that Trump would need to investigate corruption in Ukraine just doesn't match what we know about the upstanding Ukrainian gov't during that time period.

Yet when Trump is involved, Ukraine is a hotbed of corruption, helping Trump subvert the American political system (with a side-helping of Russian interference™).
exactly.

And the irony is all the people in place and that they backed are accused of being corrupt. Poreshenko was supposed to be the guy to clean up the corruption but he is accused of corruption. He was the Dems man, but he was so bad he lost to a comedian. Lutchenko comes in to replace Shokin, the guy that had to go because he was so corrupt. But Lutchenko is accused of his own corruption as well.

Like you said, everything is great when the Dems are there, but now that its Trump everyone is corrupt. LOL.
 

Horns

Member
Jun 23, 2010
4,296
391
740
Seems like a good strategy to me. Senate Republicans have openly stated they will make a mockery of the process. Overall the polls support impeachment. This is just enough rope for Republicans to damage themselves.

 

NickFire

Member
Mar 12, 2014
6,394
5,789
800
Seems like a good strategy to me. Senate Republicans have openly stated they will make a mockery of the process. Overall the polls support impeachment. This is just enough rope for Republicans to damage themselves.

So making a mockery of the process is a good strategy if you think someone else might make a mockery of the process? Considering that the potential Senate mockery would be calling for a vote on the same evidence that the house voted on, I think there's an excessive amount of projection going on.
 

Zangiefy360

Cross Forum Drama ..........Queen
Aug 30, 2018
1,176
2,128
510
Seems like a good strategy to me. Senate Republicans have openly stated they will make a mockery of the process. Overall the polls support impeachment. This is just enough rope for Republicans to damage themselves.

Let's say I've accused you of making lewd drawings of My Little Pony and young children with physical deformities. I have zero proof except for some of your acquantinces saying they know you've watched an MLP episode or two so it's possible you did it but they've never seen one of these drawings. How much time would you give me in your defense?
 

FreedomGate

Mental Gymnastics 🥇Gold Medalist🥇
Oct 10, 2018
2,586
1,432
585
www.kickstarter.com
This thread turned out differently than I imagined.

Pelosi is hoping the Senate will flip Democrat in November. Then she can send over the articles and really get rid of Trump (if he even wins re-election with this hanging over him).

If she sent over the articles now, the Senate would not convict Trump, so then Trump could swing into "I've been vindicated!" mode and have something good to campaign on.
I guess this post is the closest thing to an answer, but I am not sure Pelosi can hold onto the articles for a whole year without the senate proceeding without her.

Also you should change your username. :messenger_sunglasses:
 

cryptoadam

... and he cannot lie
Feb 21, 2018
9,012
11,568
955
This thread turned out differently than I imagined.



I guess this post is the closest thing to an answer, but I am not sure Pelosi can hold onto the articles for a whole year without the senate proceeding without her.

Also you should change your username. :messenger_sunglasses:
There is no way they can hold them.

I think the plan was to embarass the Senate and basically force them to hand control to Chuck and Nancy. Pelosi basicallly wants to set the rules for the trial in the Senate and control the process like in the House.

So IMO their hope was that the polls would show the public is so enraged that Senators would have no choice but to do what Pelosi wants.

This seems like a major miscalculation like all Dem moves. But the holidays are over now and if she doesn't send them its ridiculous. At this point I think people are starting to move on. Look on here and ERA and impeachment activity/threads has slown to a crawl. In a few weeks most people will forget that Trump was even impeached at all if they keep dragging it out.

And to think Dems sold this as Trump was such a danger that they had to ram rod this through like Mandingo with a fresh girl in the biz.
 

Humdinger

Member
Apr 21, 2010
3,320
1,609
550
I don't understand it either. Is she trying to get the senate to accommodate her? That's not going to work. Is she trying to shine a spotlight on how "biased" the senate will be? That is just pure hypocrisy, after how the democrats have handled things in the house. Is she waiting for the senate to go democrat, as was suggested earlier? That's not going to happen, and if it did, it would be in Nov. 2020, too late to make the difference she wants impeachment to make (to prevent Trump's re-election). The longer she drags it out, the worse she and the democrats look. I don't get it.
 

Scopa

The Tribe Has Spoken
Oct 27, 2017
7,499
12,123
850
your mind
I haven’t really been following this much, but I assume she has no plans to follow through with the impeachment, she just wants to keep it hanging there like a carrot so the Democrats can repetitiously bring it up during the election cycle to try and sway stupid voters.

I have no idea if she has a mandated time limit to follow through with it by U.S. law, but that’s my take.
 

sahlberg

Gold Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,143
4,511
540
Moore Park Beach
I haven’t really been following this much, but I assume she has no plans to follow through with the impeachment, she just wants to keep it hanging there like a carrot so the Democrats can repetitiously bring it up during the election cycle to try and sway stupid voters.

I have no idea if she has a mandated time limit to follow through with it by U.S. law, but that’s my take.
The articles are published. The senate can pick them up and start their process whenever they want. Regardless of what Pelosi says or does.

I expect Senate to do this shortly before some main democratic primary debates or strategic rallies that the senate candidates have planned. So they have to cancel on short notice and go back to DC to play political dog and pony shows.
Pelosi will lose it and go hysterical on tv. Will be great fun. Stock up on red wine and popcorn.

EDIT: she is holding on to it because it is becoming deeply unpolular even among her own centre-left voters and there are bunch of house representatives that are in danger of getting voted out if this charade continues.

EDIT 2: How much does Pelosi want to impeach trump? She wants it enough that she will trade impeachment with losing the house back to the republicans later this year? Is that how much she wants to impeach trump?
 
Last edited:

accel

Member
Sep 11, 2015
897
395
520
Look the whole country of Ukraine was corrupt, and in its infinite wisdom the Obama administration decided to become the piggy bank for them. Billions went to Ukraine while Dem operatives all got nice cushy jobs in the Ukraine. It wasn't just Hunter, Obama and Joe sent tons of people over there to "help" them out.

Meanwhile the guy they backed in 2016 is voted out due to corruption losing to a late night comedy host. Thats how sick the country was of the guy that Obama and Joe backed and gave the blank check too that they voted in a guy who tells jokes.
To stray off the topic of the thread for a little bit, what happened in the Ukraine is very unfortunate.

The revolution (the Maidan) was (or at least seemed) legit. The authoritarian corrupt rule was removed. However, the new rule was too amorphous and too exploitable. Even though many of the new guys ultimately wanted to build something good, they basically didn't know how the hell to do this on the scale of a country with 50+ million people. They quickly became entangled in their own compromises and their own little quid-pro-quos, and it all collapsed. Military conflicts with Russia didn't help either, obviously. That's the first harsh lesson - overthrowing the government while having good intentions is completely not enough, there needs to be some plan of what to do next, it has to make sense, and has to be enforced somehow.

Then, when it came time to elect the next president, the Ukraine voted for a nobody basically because a couple of shmucks holding keys to the media were praising that guy on TV for something like half a year. This massive praise, coupled with the even more massive and more prolonged tarring of the then-current president on the same media just made the entire vote. That's the second harsh lesson - the media is super-powerful, absent a counter-force it will rule everything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cryptoadam

appaws

Gold Member
Jan 31, 2008
2,860
1,675
1,325
Taylorsville, Ky!
To stray off the topic of the thread for a little bit, what happened in the Ukraine is very unfortunate.

The revolution (the Maidan) was (or at least seemed) legit. The authoritarian corrupt rule was removed.
You mean the removal of the duly elected head of the government?
 

accel

Member
Sep 11, 2015
897
395
520
You mean the removal of the duly elected head of the government?
Yes, I mean that. The duly elected head of the government that you are referring to was treating the country like goods for sale and was basically trading it to the highest bidder. Normally, BS like this is taken care of via political processes and popular vote. But in Ukraine the political processes were corrupt for years, they didn't function. That's why the government was overthrown. Because people didn't see what the hell else to do. (I'll remind that at the root of the rebellion was whether Ukraine would go into a trade association with EU or with Russia, the duly elected head of the government had to go EU because that's what was planned for a long time and with a lot of blood, but he traded that deal to Russia and started moving towards the association with Russia instead - for his personal gain.)

As I say, the revolution didn't turn out well, but that happened for other reasons, the original thrust was legit.
 

FreedomGate

Mental Gymnastics 🥇Gold Medalist🥇
Oct 10, 2018
2,586
1,432
585
www.kickstarter.com
Lindsey Graham has threatened to take matters into the Senates own hands since Pelosi is being accused of messing with historical procedure.

It's been over a month right? So I guess it's been long enough to make up her mind, the optics would probably be in Trumps favor if they go on the media and tell the voters that the lady who rushed through the process decided to stall the process.
 

TheContact

Member
Jan 22, 2016
3,105
976
555
mcconnell said they were ready to clear trump without giving him a proper trial. whatever you think about pelosi or the impeachment process, I can understand why pelosi is holding out until they can get a fair trial. anyone who doesn't care about giving him a proper trial is scared that something will come up in the trial that would be bad for trump. which is honestly likely the case given that he told his staff not to testify to congress and the recently unredacted emails about the ukraine funds withholding isn't a good look either
 

JORMBO

Darkness no more
Mar 5, 2009
8,132
7,142
1,470
Lindsey Graham has threatened to take matters into the Senates own hands since Pelosi is being accused of messing with historical procedure.

It's been over a month right? So I guess it's been long enough to make up her mind, the optics would probably be in Trumps favor if they go on the media and tell the voters that the lady who rushed through the process decided to stall the process.
They voted before break and are mostly just getting back now. I’d say if she doesn’t send them over this week then proceed without her.
 

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
19,832
40,343
1,290
USA
dunpachi.com
mcconnell said they were ready to clear trump without giving him a proper trial. whatever you think about pelosi or the impeachment process, I can understand why pelosi is holding out until they can get a fair trial. anyone who doesn't care about giving him a proper trial is scared that something will come up in the trial that would be bad for trump. which is honestly likely the case given that he told his staff not to testify to congress and the recently unredacted emails about the ukraine funds withholding isn't a good look either
Lots of assumptions and mind-reading there.

One question: if you are concerned that the trial will not be fair based on McConnell's previous statements that they will "clear Trump without giving him a proper trial", how do the numerous Democrat promises to impeach Trump affect your opinion of the original House impeachment?

After all, if going into the trial with bad intentions raises concerns for you, seems like a partisan vote for the hastiest impeachment in American history run by people who've promised to impeach since before he was elected would raise these same red flags for you.
 

JORMBO

Darkness no more
Mar 5, 2009
8,132
7,142
1,470
Lots of assumptions and mind-reading there.

One question: if you are concerned that the trial will not be fair based on McConnell's previous statements that they will "clear Trump without giving him a proper trial", how do the numerous Democrat promises to impeach Trump affect your opinion of the original House impeachment?

After all, if going into the trial with bad intentions raises concerns for you, seems like a partisan vote for the hastiest impeachment in American history run by people who've promised to impeach since before he was elected would raise these same red flags for you.
You don’t think Al Green properly weighed all the evidence and fairly cast his vote?!?
 

desertdroog

Member
Aug 12, 2008
3,763
4,212
1,055
The Democrats claiming the Senate will not give the articles of impeachment a fair go is projection by the very nature they handled the architecture of the articles of impeachment. She had no one to blame but her party as the House majority and not having bi-partisan support.

She has no power to dictate Senate procedure, if she has flimsy articles to present, that's on her and Adam Schiff, not the Senate.
 

TheContact

Member
Jan 22, 2016
3,105
976
555
Lots of assumptions and mind-reading there.

One question: if you are concerned that the trial will not be fair based on McConnell's previous statements that they will "clear Trump without giving him a proper trial", how do the numerous Democrat promises to impeach Trump affect your opinion of the original House impeachment?

After all, if going into the trial with bad intentions raises concerns for you, seems like a partisan vote for the hastiest impeachment in American history run by people who've promised to impeach since before he was elected would raise these same red flags for you.
definitely. the democrats who said "impeach him" literally the day he was elected and the manner in which some of the actions dems took during the impeachment process were questionable. i definitely think the democrats hate trump so much they are digging for anything to get him impeached. we know that pelosi was highly against impeachment until the ukraine memo came out. i watched the impeachment hearings and i thought both republicans and democrats made some valid points. I would like a fair and proper trial in the senate. with the proper testimony they're requesting, if it acquits trump, then the dems are done and it's going to make them look very bad in the 2020 election. if it implicates trump, then he should be charged for any potential crimes he committed. i think any time you go into a trial where the jury effectively made a predetermination is a gross injustice, and I really hope everyone else thinks the same thing as well.