US PoliEra 2019 |OT7| It's happening

[Royalan]

I'm guessing that's the main disconnect here because my immediate thoughts, and I assume others with my alignment, is "Who gives a flying fuck".

The impeachment process is just that - a process. All these terms of inquiry and investigation are meaningless. The House chooses how the process will proceed and that's that. The courts only care about the briefs, not the twitters and NYT editorials. This train is already rolling.

But again, it's all just a process. There was great scare that Pelosi was blocking even the judiciary from launching an inquiry, but that's been proven false since they've been in one for months. That was the monumental most important step of the process taken.

Floor votes, in the house and senate, can be worried about next summer. There's a lot of oversight shit that needs to get done in the interim. It ain't finishing in 2019.

Click to shrink...

I would be right on board with this whole post, but what we're seeing out of Democrats now highlights that other problem Democrats have...

Part of the reason a lot of people wanted to officially begin impeachment, outside of it being the right thing to do, was so that we could get out of that damn "will the Dems impeach???" media cycle that had the potential to never end.

And now, I'm cynical.

I'm really cynical.

And I have dragged Dem leadership before.

But not even I was cynical enough to expect Democrats to get us out of that media narrative only to plunge us into a dumber one.

You're right, it's all process. The gears are turning. But the lack of any sort of clarity or message discipline right now? "we're definitely impeaching"..."I don't think we're there yet"..."lol silly, we've been impeaching this whole time!"..."Impeachment would rip the country apart."

I'm Latrice Royale right now:

 

[shinra-bansho]

Hard disagree on it would fail the floor vote. They have 135+ Dems in support already and they will keep gaining votes as this thing builds momentum towards the end of the year (less than a month ago we had only 90 Dems in favor). And it's going to look pretty bad on the Dems voting against this so they are going to hold their nose and vote for it anyway.

In any case they are doing something in the meantime so probably best to see where the inquiry leads first.

Click to shrink...

If it ever comes to a floor vote then I assume it will pass because Pelosi isn't an idiot or a masochist.

But they have an 18 seat majority.
There are 24 Blue Dogs, I believe all the incumbents retained their seats.
21 of the new New Democrat Coalition are in R lean to strong R seats. (There is some overlap with the new Blue Dogs.)

It is easy to see it failing.

 

[shinra-bansho]

I'm going to double post because this is a distinct question that I'm now curious about:

Are people willing to see articles of impeachment pass in the House to die in the Senate...

If it meant losing the House?

 

[Pixieking]

I'm going to double post because this is a distinct question that I'm now curious about:

Are people willing to see articles of impeachment pass in the House to die in the Senate...

If it meant losing the House?

Click to shrink...

This is surely the political equivalent of a Pyrrhic Victory, and the encapsulation of Optics over actual politics. I would hope people would say no here, but...

 

[Deleted member 17092]

Except it doesn't mean that and it's stupid to assume it does and there is zero evidence that it would.

I can just as easily say impeachment will help you win the Senate and the house and you can't disprove it.

It's your damn job to do it and fuck the optics that you don't even have any real data on.

 

[XMonkey]

I'm going to double post because this is a distinct question that I'm now curious about:

Are people willing to see articles of impeachment pass in the House to die in the Senate...

If it meant losing the House?

Click to shrink...

Ya, because it won't cost Dems the House.

 

[B-Dubs]

Fair enough.

Why cant he though? Would it just be too much of a mess? I think ive seen his administration do worse things so it wouldnt be that surprising I think.

Click to shrink...

Because they work for GM and not the federal government.

 

[EvilChameleon]

Our floor in 2020 is keeping the House.

 

[adam387]

Y'all get a good deal on them crystal balls you got there?

Like, idk if it would or wouldn't cost the house. I don't think you can separate a purely political act (as impeachment with no hope of conviction would be) from political ramifications. But the possibility that it could should be a part of the consideration. And outside incredibly online folks its not like your Joe Q Public is lamenting the fact we're not impeaching everyone under the sun.

 

[dabig2]

I would be right on board with this whole post, but what we're seeing out of Democrats now highlights that other problem Democrats have...

Part of the reason a lot of people wanted to officially begin impeachment, outside of it being the right thing to do, was so that we could get out of that damn "will the Dems impeach???" media cycle that had the potential to never end.

And now, I'm cynical.

I'm really cynical.

And I have dragged Dem leadership before.

But not even I was cynical enough to expect Democrats to get us out of that media narrative only to plunge us into a dumber one.

You're right, it's all process. The gears are turning. But the lack of any sort of clarity or message discipline right now? "we're definitely impeaching"..."I don't think we're there yet"..."lol silly, we've been impeaching this whole time!"..."Impeachment would rip the country apart."

I'm Latrice Royale right now:

Click to shrink...

I hear you, but don't get it twisted, I'm far from optimistic. I'm pessimistic, but I guess more in a climate change grander scale way. I still think we can reverse a lot of wrong in this experiment on the back of impeachment in the here and now, which is vitally important towards how much striving we do in the guaranteed shitty times ahead.

So it's more of a thinking that "we either succeed or we don't. Either way, civilization is going to experience a ton of bad times regardless". Baby nihilism.

Anyways, all the hoopla about disagreements and the other Democrats being cowards and providing way too much cover fire for the regressives is just noise. Nothing they say matters at this junction. We're in official public building, fact finding mode by members of the judiciary, and I heavily doubt they're going to sit on the ungodly amount of crimes that we already know about. Like Al Green's referral, they're bullet points in a massive impeachment recommendation.

I'm also of the opinion that virtually all of us, including Congress, is out of the dark to the magnitude of Trump's bottomless crimes. Not only talking the amount, but the severity.
Also why I couldn't give a shit about Clinton, Nixon, or Jackson. Trump is guilty of all the crimes they were allegedly impeached for and that's just the easier stuff we suspect. What we're going to see over the coming months is a story, a connecting of strings brought forth by the investigations of the judiciary, aided by some of the other committees - hopefully all of them. And they'll connect all those seemingly disparate "nothingburgers" into a buffet that will make the GOP and the conservative Dems choke on it at the end - whether impeachment removes Trump or not. The information for now and the future will be out there and we'll be judged accordingly with our next actions.

Gotta start and hold our ground somewhere. I'd say the Trump administration, the literal existential nightmare of the founding fathers, is a great start. I guess at the end I'm just enough of an optimist to hope that enough members of the Democrat House believe the same.

 

[Beer Monkey]

I'm going to double post because this is a distinct question that I'm now curious about:

Are people willing to see articles of impeachment pass in the House to die in the Senate...

If it meant losing the House?

Click to shrink...

More likely to lose the house by doing nothing TBH. People are pissed who showed up in 2018.

So the bigger question is it better to not impeach in the house and at least increase the chance of permanent GOP rule. Because that's their goal right now, and why they are loading up the courts and locking down oversight. The assault on democracy is only going to grow, not diminish.

 

[Royalan]

I'm going to double post because this is a distinct question that I'm now curious about:

Are people willing to see articles of impeachment pass in the House to die in the Senate...

If it meant losing the House?

Click to shrink...

This is a false choice? I don't think bringing impeachment to the floor is going to cost the House even if it fails. At least, I don't think it's more likely than the risk we're currently taking -- the Democrats in Congress sitting on their hands, being perceived as doing nothing, bumbling their messaging left and right, while quite possibly nominating Joe Biden as our standard-bearer.

But there's another point here, and someone mentioned this earlier: I'm young...ish. Definitely young enough that it's highly likely I will live long enough to suffer through another Republican administration. Republican administrations, going back further than I've been alive, have only gotten more visibly corrupt and flippant toward the role of government. Mostly because Democrats never make them pay for it. We always expert them to learn from it. And all Republicans ever learn is how to get better at it.

If Democrats don't apply some sort of accountability here, then we just took part in writing the "For Idiots" guide on completely subverting American government.

 

[Dahbomb]

I'm going to double post because this is a distinct question that I'm now curious about:

Are people willing to see articles of impeachment pass in the House to die in the Senate...

If it meant losing the House?

Click to shrink...

That's a strange and hyperbolic question.

First of all hardly anyone really wants it to go into the Senate to begin with. Get the inquiry going, air the dirty laundry, make the reelection campaign difficult and strenuous for Trump in 2020. Don't even have to go all the way to the Senate, a lot of damage could be done before that.

Secondly there is little evidence to suggest that an impeachment inquiry would result in a loss of the House. Democrats are in favor to hold the House in 2020. There is barely any precedence for impeachment proceedings negatively impacting the party that is enacting the impeachment. If anything you are more likely to lose the House by doing nothing.

But it answer your question... no I would not want that.

 

[Tamanon]

Impeachment isn't hitting the floor unless there's enough evidence that even the moderates don't feel a sting from voting for it.

That's literally been the point of Pelosi's dance.

 

[Deleted member 17092]

Yep, I'm sick of the do nothing and vote attitude that is very prevalent on this board. That's how we keep being a majority party that is utterly beholden to a conservative white minority. Keep doing the same shit expect the same fucking results. Your optimism is actually tiring and it isn't grounded in reality. Hey 2 out of the last last 5 generals stolen and 4 illegitimate sitting SC justices, no big deal, just vote and all will be well. Nah. Wake the fuck up.

 

[shinra-bansho]

There are 31 districts represented by Democrats that Trump won. So I really don't know where this confidence comes from that what is ultimately a symbolic attempt at removing Trump would have no political ramifications.

 

[Sheepinator]

https://www.mediaite.com/trump/trum...ons-contradicting-pompeo-mnuchin-and-himself/

The blatant lies are sometimes staggering. Media, talk about the Dems in disarray please.

Click to shrink...

That's surreal. "That thing my administration and I said, it's FAKE NEWS."

Checking the futures, stock market down close to 1%, oil up 10%-11%. If Iran is responsible, you could make the argument that Trump's actions led to this. He's the one who backed the Saudis in their Yemen atrocities, and it's his sanctions which have pushed Iran to need higher oil prices.

 

[adam387]

Again, where is the evidence to suggest that your average voter who voted for us in the midterm is upset we haven't impeached XYZ. We did not run on impeachment. We ran on oversight, sure, we ran as a check to the GOP's dumbass agenda....but we did not make a campaign promise to impeach the motherfuckers. Impeachment of Trump is still underwater. idk of polling on impeaching Kav because...I don't think your average voter even gives two shits.

Literally the only place I ever hear people lament about the lack of impeachment is online, and only in certain circles.The "the voters are PISSED" about this is like....well the opposite of wishful thinking.

 

[Deleted member 24149]

Again, where is the evidence to suggest that your average voter who voted for us in the midterm is upset we haven't impeached XYZ. We did not run on impeachment. We ran on oversight, sure, we ran as a check to the GOP's dumbass agenda....but we did not make a campaign promise to impeach the motherfuckers. Impeachment of Trump is still underwater. idk of polling on impeaching Kav because...I don't think your average voter even gives two shits.

Literally the only place I ever hear people lament about the lack of impeachment is online, and only in certain circles.The "the voters are PISSED" about this is like....well the opposite of wishful thinking.

Click to shrink...

Is there some other method of oversight that congress has over Trump that isn't Impeachment that I've missed out on?

 

[shinra-bansho]

Except it doesn't mean that and it's stupid to assume it does and there is zero evidence that it would.

I can just as easily say impeachment will help you win the Senate and the house and you can't disprove it.

It's your damn job to do it and fuck the optics that you don't even have any real data on.

Click to shrink...

I mean you could say that. But then you also have no basis for it as opposed to actual district leans, election results and public opinion polling.

 

[XMonkey]

There are 31 districts represented by Democrats that Trump won. So I really don't know where this confidence comes from that what is ultimately a symbolic attempt at removing Trump would have no political ramifications.

Click to shrink...

I'm confused. Do you think those Democrats won those districts because the people there like Trump?

 

[Tamanon]

Is there some other method of oversight that congress has over Trump that isn't Impeachment that I've missed out on?

Click to shrink...

Most of it?

 

[adam387]

Is there some other method of oversight that congress has over Trump that isn't Impeachment that I've missed out on?

Click to shrink...

Literally any investigation into the Administration is oversight.
There are currently dozens of active investigations.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/do...s-trump-his-administration-full-list-n1010131

Here's a list

 

[Royalan]

Impeachment isn't hitting the floor unless there's enough evidence that even the moderates don't feel a sting from voting for it.

That's literally been the point of Pelosi's dance.

Click to shrink...

But that's the problem. We're already there. We've already been there.

The case for impeaching Trump has been there for over a year. Let my Queen Miss Maxine tell it, and we should have been drafting the papers day 2 (and the gag is she's been right about that long).

We're officially at the point where there's so much known evidence that even the writing behind Buffy (season 6) would be able to weave together a compelling narrative.

We're there.

So I'm really hoping this is coming down to strategic timing. Because Congress should already have the team in place to put these pieces together to form a picture nobody could deny.

 

[Gotchaye]

If Democrats don't apply some sort of accountability here, then we just took part in writing the "For Idiots" guide on completely subverting American government.

Click to shrink...

This is true but also I still have no idea what impeachment is supposed to accomplish. Impeaching just means that that guide has a footnote about how if you get impeached don't worry there are still no consequences.

To my mind, impeachment is not any sort of accountability. I would say that the only real hope of genuine accountability here is prosecution after the DoJ is no longer led by Trump appointees. That's how you disincentivize this in the future. Obviously this is even more politically fraught but it has the upside of being potentially effectual.

 

[Deleted member 17092]

Bunch of pussyfooters in here ain't worth talking to anymore. You have a grip on this board and I think maybe y'all are starting to lose it because that's the actual reality on the ground. Your brand of complete moderate inaction is starting to rightfully lose ground.

 

[shinra-bansho]

I'm confused. Do you think those Democrats won those districts because the people there like Trump?

Click to shrink...

They liked him enough to elect him President.

I mean given the reverse hypothetical, where not holding a vote on articles of impeachment leads to a loss of the House, the obvious answer is that people shouldn't support that.

But there's literally zero evidence this is the case, since... It's the current status quo and it's likely that the Democrats hold or extend their House majority already.

 

[Dahbomb]

There are 31 districts represented by Democrats that Trump won. So I really don't know where this confidence comes from that what is ultimately a symbolic attempt at removing Trump would have no political ramifications.

Click to shrink...

The bolded is why. That the districts turned to be Democratic means that in part the voters disapproved of Trump in some way. You are likely to flip other districts as well when more of Trump's dirty laundry is aired and where there is further disapproval. This really only backfires if it goes all the way to the Senate which it really shouldn't.

It's a political gamble make no mistake about it. It's a gamble that can result in a bigger Democratic win in 2020 or a crushing loss. But the bigger gamble is to do nothing at all because then you are gambling not just the 2020-24 era but all eras beyond it.

 

[Suiko]

Bunch of pussyfooters in here ain't worth talking to anymore. You have a grip on this board and I think maybe y'all are starting to lose it because that's the actual reality on the ground. Your brand of complete moderate inaction is starting to rightfully lose ground.

Click to shrink...

You said that several posts ago. Why are you still here if you are just going to complain about other posters?

 

[Deleted member 17092]

The bolded is why. That the districts turned to be Democratic means that in part the voters disapproved of Trump in some way. You are likely to flip other districts as well when more of Trump's dirty laundry is aired and where there is further disapproval. This really only backfires if it goes all the way to the Senate which it really shouldn't.

It's a political gamble make no mistake about it. It's a gamble that can result in a bigger Democratic win in 2020 or a crushing loss. But the bigger gamble is to do nothing at all because then you are gambling not just the 2020-24 era but all eras beyond it.

Click to shrink...

Yep, folks dont seem to understand the GOP is trying to go for the whole ballgame and cheat if they have to. Dems are just thinking about getting out of the inning honorably. Yeah, good luck.

 

[Royalan]

This is true but also I still have no idea what impeachment is supposed to accomplish. Impeaching just means that that guide has a footnote about how if you get impeached don't worry there are still no consequences.

To my mind, impeachment is not any sort of accountability. I would say that the only real hope of genuine accountability here is prosecution after the DoJ is no longer led by Trump appointees. That's how you disincentivize this in the future. Obviously this is even more politically fraught but it has the upside of being potentially effectual.

Click to shrink...

I mean, and this is no shade, this is true and I agree with it...only because I keep imagining what impeachment could do in the hands of effective messengers. And Dem leadership is anything but that right now, and they stifle the voices of the people in their caucus who are good at that.

I just look at Republicans and see what they were able to accomplish with Benghazi. Fucking Benghazi.

Democrats as they are now would absolutely bumble whatever messaging benefit they could get out of impeachment.

 

[shinra-bansho]

The bolded is why. That the districts turned to be Democratic means that in part the voters disapproved of Trump in some way. You are likely to flip other districts as well when more of Trump's dirty laundry is aired and where there is further disapproval. This really only backfires if it goes all the way to the Senate which it really shouldn't.

It's a political gamble make no mistake about it. It's a gamble that can result in a bigger Democratic win in 2020 or a crushing loss. But the bigger gamble is to do nothing at all because then you are gambling not just the 2020-24 era but all eras beyond it.

Click to shrink...

I mean many of these Districts also went for Romney. They're R lean to strong R districts. Not all of them are freshmen.

Do you think freshman Ben McAdams in Utah 4th that went for Romney and Trump benefits from having to vote For for articles of Impeachment?

Do you think a long time incumbent Collin Peterson in Minnesota 7th, that had gone GOP since Bush/Gore benefits?

I don't really understand the notion that the bigger gamble is not introducing and passing articles of impeachment, since that's not the counterfactual. It's the status quo. And it doesn't seem to be harming House prospects.

 

[Ortix]

Bunch of pussyfooters in here ain't worth talking to anymore. You have a grip on this board and I think maybe y'all are starting to lose it because that's the actual reality on the ground. Your brand of complete moderate inaction is starting to rightfully lose ground.

Click to shrink...

We can't all be as enlightened as you.

 

[Dahbomb]

Again, where is the evidence to suggest that your average voter who voted for us in the midterm is upset we haven't impeached XYZ. We did not run on impeachment. We ran on oversight, sure, we ran as a check to the GOP's dumbass agenda....but we did not make a campaign promise to impeach the motherfuckers. Impeachment of Trump is still underwater. idk of polling on impeaching Kav because...I don't think your average voter even gives two shits.

Literally the only place I ever hear people lament about the lack of impeachment is online, and only in certain circles.The "the voters are PISSED" about this is like....well the opposite of wishful thinking.

Click to shrink...

The evidence is that in the past when impeachment has been brought up in the past like with Nixon, it only had a 30-35% approval rating (which is similar to what Trump has now?. As history has shown, when impeachment process moves forward the movement gains more traction among the US population. There isn't going to be widespread approval until there is more formal proceedings. That's basically what Nadler cited as well.

As far as the public goes, they should be aware that there is an actual investigation going on (which there is, multiple in fact). The real issue is the mixed messaging from the Democrats. Can't really approve of an impeachment when not even the opposing party has their story straight.

And the question shouldn't be "where's your evidence that people are interested in this?" The question should be "should Donald Trump be impeached?" This whole argument that is being presented is the same "electability" argument that is propped up around Joe Biden.

 

[adam387]

"actually reality on the ground" without a single objective data point to back up said claim. K.

 

[XMonkey]

They liked him enough to elect him President.

I mean given the reverse hypothetical, where not holding a vote on articles of impeachment leads to a loss of the House, the obvious answer is that people shouldn't support that.

But there's literally zero evidence this is the case, since... It's the current status quo and it's likely that the Democrats hold or extend their House majority already.

Click to shrink...

Ya, they gave him a shot in 2016 and then didn't like what they saw and that's why a Democrat won in 2018. If they actually liked Trump those districts probably aren't flipping. That's my point.

So, where's the evidence all of these districts will just swing back to a Republican if Democrats try to impeach the guy they don't seem to like?

 

[Deleted member 24149]

Literally any investigation into the Administration is oversight.
There are currently dozens of active investigations.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/do...s-trump-his-administration-full-list-n1010131

Here's a list

Click to shrink...

But what actions can they take against the federal government if they decide to?

 

[shinra-bansho]

I mean I don't expect my hypothetical to come to pass, but it's a valid hypothetical. As opposed to the reverse that keeps getting touted which really has no basis in reality.

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/09/12/politics/democrats-impeachment-analysis/index.html

You can see here which districts Trump won.
Which Clinton won.
And which are publicly For impeachment.

Nancy Pelosi's district is not going to go R because she doesn't bring Articles of Impeachment to the floor.

Frederica Wilson and her big hat aren't getting booted out for a Republican.

Ya, they gave him a shot in 2016 and then didn't like what they saw and that's why a Democrat won in 2018. If they actually liked Trump those districts probably aren't flipping. That's my point.

So, where's the evidence all of these districts will just swing back to a Republican if Democrats try to impeach the guy they don't seem to like?

Click to shrink...

They aren't all flips, there are incumbents, which you potentially endanger with an easy attack point.

 

[Dahbomb]

I don't really understand the notion that the bigger gamble is not introducing and passing articles of impeachment, since that's not the counterfactual. It's the status quo. And it doesn't seem to be harming House prospects.

Click to shrink...

If you don't understand this then you definitely don't understand the big picture or the future at all. Maybe you lose some districts, maybe you gain some districts... but this shouldn't even be part of the calculus of holding a derelict president accountable.

What are you going to do when the next Republican President shoots someone in front of the White House (since we are playing the "what if" game)? Are you going to expect the Democratic party to quibble over districts then too? You are going to want them to maintain a status quo in hopes to win back the presidency and maintaun the House? Are you going to worry about those voters who voted for George/Romney/Obama/Trump in the past?

 

[shinra-bansho]

I understand a reality where Articles of Impeachment probably won't pass a Floor vote anyway, so I'm exploring the electoral consequences of if they did.

I don't see how Trump is held accountable when there are literally zero consequences to him.

I don't really see any issue with Nadler's inquiry.

 

[Kirblar]

Don't actually hold the impeachment vote, just go full Benghazi is the answer here.

 

[Dahbomb]

Another question worth exploring is if Trump loses in 2020... is anyone even going to indict him? Former attorney general doesn't even think that's a good idea! (Citing that Ford pardoned Nixon because indicting a former president would tear the country apart)

If Trump gets reelected the 5 year obstruction of justice statute of limitation passes and he can't get indicted for it after serving his second term. Probably why he wants that reelection so badly outside just being a power hungry lunatic. At that point only an impeachment stops him and even the most optimistic folks don't expect a flip of the Senate.

We would all be having such a different conversation with a Democratic senate.

 

[Royalan]

Don't actually hold the impeachment vote, just go full Benghazi is the answer here.

Click to shrink...

You know what...yes.

 

[Ogodei]

Thing is, if you don't win elections, it literally doesn't matter that you did the right thing. It's nice to entertain the idea that Impeachment is about holding bad people accountable, but it's not. It's a political tool and is to be used as such.

 

[Deleted member 24149]

Don't actually hold the impeachment vote, just go full Benghazi is the answer here.

Click to shrink...

The best take honestly.

 

[Gotchaye]

Another question worth exploring is if Trump loses in 2020... is anyone even going to indict him? Former attorney general doesn't even think that's a good idea! (Citing that Ford pardoned Nixon because indicting a former president would tear the country apart)

Click to shrink...

Yeah I go back and forth on whether I would like to see something along these lines asked in a debate to pin people down. You obviously don't want to be saying "yes we will lock him up" but maybe a commitment to allow the AG to follow the evidence where it leads and not allow political considerations to determine the outcome would be doable.

 

[shinra-bansho]

Don't actually hold the impeachment vote, just go full Benghazi is the answer here.

Click to shrink...

I mean that's basically what's happening. It's what Gotchaye was basically arguing is the best path.

So I generally don't know what people are wanting to occur beyond this and why.

 

[Arm Van Dam]

On NYT's The Weekly, that story about 5 month old Constantin getting separated from his Romanian father by DHS on the border due to applying for asylum and given to foster parents in Michigan was fucking heartbreaking, at least they got reunited but fuck, imagine the trauma for the separated children who'll process this shit for years. The fact that the DHS Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties lodged so many complaints to the main office saying it was legally and constitutionally fucked up and was in the dark about contacting the families and keeping track of the children was infuriating. Fuck everyone especially Nielsen and Miller who was involved in crafting and enforcing the child separation policy and fuck Sessions for his so-called "zero-tolerance" policy, same thing goes for Barr as well.

 

[adam387]

Don't actually hold the impeachment vote, just go full Benghazi is the answer here.

Click to shrink...

This is totally 100% correct and the smart way to do it. The fact that the right gets this but the left starts lamenting and screaming is one of the reasons the GOP "wins" messaging in a way we don't. With the left it's either "Do this one specific thing" or "YOU WONT DO ANYTHING!" there's never any nuance or middle ground. We need to learn to play the game a bit better.

 

[Dahbomb]

Don't actually hold the impeachment vote, just go full Benghazi is the answer here.

Click to shrink...

I thought that's what most people wanted already?