

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) is already drafting articles of impeachment related to Trump's firing of FBI Director James Comey, believing there's enough evidence of Trump's obstruction of justice to begin an impeachment inquiry (not to mention Trump's blatant violation of the Constitutions emoluments clause by profiting off his presidency, and much else).
But Democratic leaders are pushing back, warning there aren't enough facts to justify an impeachment inquiry at this point, and, in any event, such an inquiry would politicize ongoing congressional investigations.
"The advantage of introducing a bill of impeachment now - even attempting to do so - is that such an action might itself galvanize the vast majority of Americans who want Trump out of office. It could mobilize and energize people around the most important immediate issue facing the country."Baloney.
Historically, the three previous impeachment inquiries in the House (involving presidents Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon, and Bill Clinton) rested on less evidence of obstruction of justice than is already publicly known about Trump.
Comey's testimony to Congress is itself more than enough - confirming that Trump demanded Comey's loyalty, asked Comey to stop investigating Michael Flynn, repeatedly told Comey the FBI investigation was a "cloud" on his presidency, and asked Comey to declare publicly that Trump wasn't an object of the investigation
In addition, we have Trump's interview with Lester Holt on NBC and Trump's subsequent meeting with Russian officials in the Oval Office. In both instances, Trump connected his firing of Comey with the Russian investigation.
Also bear in mind the obstructions of justice that caused the House to impeach previous presidents concerned issues far less serious than Trump's possible collusion with a foreign power to win election.
Democratic leaders say they don't want to talk about impeachment now because they're worried about politicizing the current congressional investigations, which aren't impeachment inquiries. Hello? Republicans have already politicized them.
The real reason Democratic leaders don't want to seek an impeachment now is they know there's zero chance that Republicans, who now control both houses of Congress, would support such a move. So why engage in a purely symbolic gesture?
Democratic leaders figure that between now and the midterm elections there will be even more revelations from non-partisan sources - future testimony by Trump operatives like Michael Flynn and Roger Stone, early reports from Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation, and leaks to the press - that will build the case, and fuel more public outrage.
That outrage will give Democrats a strong chance of taking back the House and maybe even the Senate. Then they'll really impeach Trump.
I can't argue with the political logic of Democratic leaders. And if their strategy will lead to Trump's ouster sooner than any other way, I'm all for it.
But here's the problem. It's not clear America can wait for the midterm elections, followed by what's likely to be a long and drawn-out impeachment investigation, followed by a trial in the Senate. (Note that none of the presidents listed above was ever convicted by the Senate and thrown out of office.)
With each passing day, Donald Trump becomes a greater danger to America and the world. We don't have time.
The advantage of introducing a bill of impeachment now - even attempting to do so - is that such an action might itself galvanize the vast majority of Americans who want Trump out of office. It could mobilize and energize people around the most important immediate issue facing the country.
Never underestimate the power of a public aroused to action. It is worth recalling that Nixon resigned of his own accord before the House had even voted out an impeachment resolution. The American public demanded it.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) is already drafting articles of impeachment related to Trump's firing of FBI Director James Comey, believing there's enough evidence of Trump's obstruction of justice to begin an impeachment inquiry (not to mention Trump's blatant violation of the Constitutions emoluments clause by profiting off his presidency, and much else).
But Democratic leaders are pushing back, warning there aren't enough facts to justify an impeachment inquiry at this point, and, in any event, such an inquiry would politicize ongoing congressional investigations.
"The advantage of introducing a bill of impeachment now - even attempting to do so - is that such an action might itself galvanize the vast majority of Americans who want Trump out of office. It could mobilize and energize people around the most important immediate issue facing the country."Baloney.
Historically, the three previous impeachment inquiries in the House (involving presidents Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon, and Bill Clinton) rested on less evidence of obstruction of justice than is already publicly known about Trump.
Comey's testimony to Congress is itself more than enough - confirming that Trump demanded Comey's loyalty, asked Comey to stop investigating Michael Flynn, repeatedly told Comey the FBI investigation was a "cloud" on his presidency, and asked Comey to declare publicly that Trump wasn't an object of the investigation
In addition, we have Trump's interview with Lester Holt on NBC and Trump's subsequent meeting with Russian officials in the Oval Office. In both instances, Trump connected his firing of Comey with the Russian investigation.
Also bear in mind the obstructions of justice that caused the House to impeach previous presidents concerned issues far less serious than Trump's possible collusion with a foreign power to win election.
Democratic leaders say they don't want to talk about impeachment now because they're worried about politicizing the current congressional investigations, which aren't impeachment inquiries. Hello? Republicans have already politicized them.
The real reason Democratic leaders don't want to seek an impeachment now is they know there's zero chance that Republicans, who now control both houses of Congress, would support such a move. So why engage in a purely symbolic gesture?
Democratic leaders figure that between now and the midterm elections there will be even more revelations from non-partisan sources - future testimony by Trump operatives like Michael Flynn and Roger Stone, early reports from Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation, and leaks to the press - that will build the case, and fuel more public outrage.
That outrage will give Democrats a strong chance of taking back the House and maybe even the Senate. Then they'll really impeach Trump.
I can't argue with the political logic of Democratic leaders. And if their strategy will lead to Trump's ouster sooner than any other way, I'm all for it.
But here's the problem. It's not clear America can wait for the midterm elections, followed by what's likely to be a long and drawn-out impeachment investigation, followed by a trial in the Senate. (Note that none of the presidents listed above was ever convicted by the Senate and thrown out of office.)
With each passing day, Donald Trump becomes a greater danger to America and the world. We don't have time.
The advantage of introducing a bill of impeachment now - even attempting to do so - is that such an action might itself galvanize the vast majority of Americans who want Trump out of office. It could mobilize and energize people around the most important immediate issue facing the country.
Never underestimate the power of a public aroused to action. It is worth recalling that Nixon resigned of his own accord before the House had even voted out an impeachment resolution. The American public demanded it.
Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) is already drafting articles of impeachment related to Trump's firing of FBI Director James Comey, believing there's enough evidence of Trump's obstruction of justice to begin an impeachment inquiry (not to mention Trump's blatant violation of the Constitutions emoluments clause by profiting off his presidency, and much else).
But Democratic leaders are pushing back, warning there aren't enough facts to justify an impeachment inquiry at this point, and, in any event, such an inquiry would politicize ongoing congressional investigations.
"The advantage of introducing a bill of impeachment now - even attempting to do so - is that such an action might itself galvanize the vast majority of Americans who want Trump out of office. It could mobilize and energize people around the most important immediate issue facing the country."Baloney.
Historically, the three previous impeachment inquiries in the House (involving presidents Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon, and Bill Clinton) rested on less evidence of obstruction of justice than is already publicly known about Trump.
Comey's testimony to Congress is itself more than enough - confirming that Trump demanded Comey's loyalty, asked Comey to stop investigating Michael Flynn, repeatedly told Comey the FBI investigation was a "cloud" on his presidency, and asked Comey to declare publicly that Trump wasn't an object of the investigation
In addition, we have Trump's interview with Lester Holt on NBC and Trump's subsequent meeting with Russian officials in the Oval Office. In both instances, Trump connected his firing of Comey with the Russian investigation.
Also bear in mind the obstructions of justice that caused the House to impeach previous presidents concerned issues far less serious than Trump's possible collusion with a foreign power to win election.
Democratic leaders say they don't want to talk about impeachment now because they're worried about politicizing the current congressional investigations, which aren't impeachment inquiries. Hello? Republicans have already politicized them.
The real reason Democratic leaders don't want to seek an impeachment now is they know there's zero chance that Republicans, who now control both houses of Congress, would support such a move. So why engage in a purely symbolic gesture?
Democratic leaders figure that between now and the midterm elections there will be even more revelations from non-partisan sources - future testimony by Trump operatives like Michael Flynn and Roger Stone, early reports from Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation, and leaks to the press - that will build the case, and fuel more public outrage.
That outrage will give Democrats a strong chance of taking back the House and maybe even the Senate. Then they'll really impeach Trump.
I can't argue with the political logic of Democratic leaders. And if their strategy will lead to Trump's ouster sooner than any other way, I'm all for it.
But here's the problem. It's not clear America can wait for the midterm elections, followed by what's likely to be a long and drawn-out impeachment investigation, followed by a trial in the Senate. (Note that none of the presidents listed above was ever convicted by the Senate and thrown out of office.)
With each passing day, Donald Trump becomes a greater danger to America and the world. We don't have time.
The advantage of introducing a bill of impeachment now - even attempting to do so - is that such an action might itself galvanize the vast majority of Americans who want Trump out of office. It could mobilize and energize people around the most important immediate issue facing the country.
Never underestimate the power of a public aroused to action. It is worth recalling that Nixon resigned of his own accord before the House had even voted out an impeachment resolution. The American public demanded it.