And Nancy settles the question on impeachment. Nope?

[nOOky]

There is enough evidence to impeach, yes. But in this case the HOR wants the evidence to be such that at least those voters on the fence about Trump can undeniably know that he committed a crime. Pelosi knows that if there is absolute evidence that DJT not only obstructed, but did so in a manner so egregious or so beyond the norm that the people call on the Senate to act also. As it stands now, if DJT were impeached the Senate would remain mute, his staunchest supporters wouldn't care either way, and those on the fence would likely soon forget about it after a short time. There needs to be a smoking gun, and Pelosi is intelligent enough to know that they have some time yet to dig down to find that gun, and regardless, the time isn't right before the next election. As it stands with the evidence of obstruction currently available, there's just not enough there, voters have already had the chance to see it, and judging by their reactions, many have already moved on from it.

 

[Maxima1]

There is enough evidence to impeach, yes. But in this case the HOR wants the evidence to be such that at least those voters on the fence about Trump can undeniably know that he committed a crime. Pelosi knows that if there is absolute evidence that DJT not only obstructed, but did so in a manner so egregious or so beyond the norm that the people call on the Senate to act also. As it stands now, if DJT were impeached the Senate would remain mute, his staunchest supporters wouldn't care either way, and those on the fence would likely soon forget about it after a short time. There needs to be a smoking gun, and Pelosi is intelligent enough to know that they have some time yet to dig down to find that gun, and regardless, the time isn't right before the next election. As it stands with the evidence of obstruction currently available, there's just not enough there, voters have already had the chance to see it, and judging by their reactions, many have already moved on from it.

The evidence for many things is already there. So it's all just a political calculation to maximize its impact by having it closer to the election OR Pelosi intends to never pursue it, which would be incredibly stupid of her. The latter is not out of the possibilities considering Nadler is idiotically considering having Mueller do only a private meeting with them. Mueller needs to come out and say he would have indicted Donnie under Barr's premise that he could have made a charging decision. That would turn the tables.

 

[Jhhnn]

The evidence for many things is already there. So it's all just a political calculation to maximize its impact by having it closer to the election OR Pelosi intends to never pursue it, which would be incredibly stupid of her. The latter is not out of the possibilities considering Nadler is idiotically considering having Mueller do only a private meeting with them. Mueller needs to come out and say he would have indicted Donnie under Barr's premise that he could have made a charging decision. That would turn the tables.

Or maybe Nadler just wants to hear what Mueller has to say free of the hoopla of the cameras & the public grandstanding of GOP members. Dems don't want to appear hostile to Mueller so they'll accommodate him, at least for now. It's just a start. Dems can call him back for public testimony if they want. We're moving forward at the speed of Congress.