Why impeachment, despite Mueller's failure to deliver?
I hadn't quite put these dots together, but it makes a lot of sense. Specifically, if Justice Ginsburg is in such poor health that she might not make it to the next inauguration, Democrats will be in an utter panic. (We The People know that RBG is not in good health, generally, but we lack information on the urgency of the matter that insider Democrats probably do). The Republicans control the Senate and will be able to confirm a replacement, barring shenanigans, and assuming the seat opens up with a reasonable amount of time before the election.
But, the Democrats will say (while pointing to Merrick Garland), should we really allow a President who has been impeached but not yet tried in the Senate to nominate a Supreme Court Justice? Shouldn't the Senate conduct the trial before confirming such an important post? And that's actually a reasonable position... assuming the impeachment itself was reasonable, anyway.
So the "impeachment" is, at least in part, an emergency brake on RBG's seat being filled (if necessary) by Trump.
There are a lot of reasons Democrats want to impeach Trump, but none of them are actually impeachable offenses, and the impeachment timeline is heavily dependent on just a few of them.
As for the odds on whether Pelosi considers impeachment serious or just a media distraction and election tactic -- when she actually holds votes on articles of impeachment in the House, then and only then will she be serious about it. Right now she's using the language of impeachment without actually voting on it, and that tells me it's an electoral/distraction tactic.
This entry was published Sun Oct 27 06:28:42 CDT 2019 by TriggerFinger
and last updated 2019-10-27 06:28:42.0.