Trump’s stalling tactics may force the Democrats to impeach him

That may be the only way to get the testimony and information. Trump is going to try to block everything. He’s obviously hiding something.

If Trump chokes off all oversight, while escalating pressure on DOJ to prosecute his critics, it will create an increasingly unstable situation.

In sum: Trump may end up forcing Dems to choose between total confrontation and total capitulation.

My piece: https://t.co/NKiAYJCBhj
— Greg Sargent (@ThePlumLineGS) April 26, 2019

Let's boil this down.

1) Pelosis says there are alternate routes to the truth and accountability, other than impeachment inquiry

2) Trump is closing off those routes

3) Thus, Trump is forcing Dems to choose between impeachment and total self-neuteringhttps://t.co/cLSk8jHUnq
— Greg Sargent (@ThePlumLineGS) April 24, 2019

There is a practical consequence of not launching an impeachment inquiry and that is increasing the chances that White House efforts to stonewall will succeed. Congress' powers to investigate the executive are at their apex during impeachment. https://t.co/Yzo4lOXHJ3
— Judd Legum (@JuddLegum) April 23, 2019

Trump is laying down the gauntlet on impeachment by taking this outlandish position. He is all but telling Congress that, as president, he’s free to disregard its existence. It’s like saying 2 > 1 so the Art. II Branch Trumps the Art. I Branch. Insane. https://t.co/LcV66jcixR
— Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) April 24, 2019

such a well-reported article by bob costa and team https://t.co/nxdAekDIeb
— Jonathan Swan (@jonathanvswan) April 24, 2019

Trump is resisting every Congressional request for testimony and documents related to our oversight responsibility.

Like an aspiring autocrat, he doesn’t recognize the co-equal branches of our government.

He has lived his entire life without accountability.

That ends now. https://t.co/QixgD7zGBs
— Adam Schiff (@AdamSchiff) April 24, 2019

Donald Trump seems to be daring the House of Representatives to copy, and then vote for, the Contempt of Congress Article of Impeachment approved decades ago against Richard Nixon (Art. III).https://t.co/LcV66jcixR
— Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) April 24, 2019

One problem with the "hearings but not impeachment" plan is that Trump can effectively nullify Democratic hearings. It's appalling, but he probably has the gall to nullify lesser, non-impeachment hearings. But nullifying impeachment hearings would be another thing altogether. https://t.co/HJWygjikPb
— Adam Jentleson 🎈 (@AJentleson) April 23, 2019

The we-don’t-want-to-play-anymore “privilege.” Sorry, that one’s not in the books. https://t.co/vLpLxHFKng
— George Conway (@gtconway3d) April 24, 2019

BREAKING: Cummings plans to schedule a contempt vote for Carl Kline for defying subpoena to testify on security clearances. pic.twitter.com/ojuYQM4AUp
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) April 23, 2019

The President of the United States is ignoring a lawful request submitted by a congressional oversight committee…and it's barely news.

We must not become desensitized to this flagrant flaunting of the law. https://t.co/Axr6kH3E7o
— Robert Reich (@RBReich) April 23, 2019

This is a delay tactic that will ultimately fail. Executive privilege has already been waived, given Don McGahn's extensive statements to Mueller. Even if it was not, I expect courts would not permit executive privilege to be used to block McGahn's testimony in this context. https://t.co/7jMN4PWQ2H
— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) April 23, 2019

Two things about executive privilege: one, it exists to protect confidentiality, and McGahn’s account of events is already public. Two, it can never be used to cover up wrongdoing. Trump’s assertion is incredibly weak.
— Matthew Miller (@matthewamiller) April 23, 2019

Some press accounts frame Trump's refusal to cooperate w/ Congress as a partisan dispute. It's really a dispute over our system of checks & balances. As @seungminkim reports, Trump also has refused Senate Rs when he hasn't liked their requests https://t.co/FOGW06fvu4 pic.twitter.com/qMwb5ACKr9
— Nick Schwellenbach (@schwellenbach) April 25, 2019

Should Congress move ahead with impeachment? @YAppelbaum and @ezraklein debate, with @IsaacDovere moderating, on #RadioAtlantic. Listen @ApplePodcasts: https://t.co/S5iKpMvUDt
— The Atlantic (@TheAtlantic) April 29, 2019

Indictments, not impeachment

I agree with Pelosi. Let’s not talk about impeachment now. We need to concentrate on policy issues. Polls show impeachment is not popular now. Let’s talk about health care, climate change, racism, etc. If impeachment was under discussion, the media would cover that instead. I will include tweets with different views on this issue. There is not a consensus.

I don’t think there will ever be bi-partisan support for impeachment. Fox News will brainwash Trump cult members so they will think the whole thing’s a witch hunt and he did nothing wrong. I would support impeachment if I thought enough Republicans in the Senate would approve of it. That’s not going to happen.

If Trump is guilty of crimes (which I think is already obvious), let’s get him indicted. If it can be done while he is president, fine. If not, indict him on 1/21/21, the first day he is not president if he serves one term. Lock him up!

Pelosi’s allies believe her skepticism about impeachment does 3 major things:

1.) protects her Majority Makers

2.) gives her an exit strategy should Mueller find nothing

3.) Strengthens her leverage if something serious arises & she reverse course to impeach him later. https://t.co/AzhJasJISY
— Rachael Bade (@rachaelmbade) March 12, 2019

Pelosi is smart, but this is good-cop/bad-cop. She goes high road knowing Nadler/Schiff continue digging. If something egregious that Mueller somehow hasn't found pops, they'll impeach. O'wise, plan has always been drive Trump's numbers down so he's unelectable by autumn 2020.
— Andy McCarthy (@AndrewCMcCarthy) March 12, 2019

Disagree with @RepAdamSchiff. This shouldn't be the threshold for launching impeachment hearings. It gives Trump's disinformation/propaganda machine effective veto power over a decision that House Democrats should make strictly based on what facts emerge: https://t.co/Y9tdrgAts9 https://t.co/V4VLvOUeu9
— Greg Sargent (@ThePlumLineGS) March 12, 2019

Strikes me that largely missing from the Pelosi coverage was this line: “…unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan." Isn't that, in practical terms, the standard for impeachment? https://t.co/EHGGHJFnFm
— Jim Sciutto (@jimsciutto) March 12, 2019

So the line now seems to be not whether Trump's offenses are worthy of impeachment, but whether they're obvious enough to get GOP votes for removal.

That's an extremely high bar. It's also one that plenty on left will argue isn't principled and allows GOP to dictate the terms.
— Aaron Blake (@AaronBlake) March 11, 2019

I suspect this is a political move by Pelosi, not a line in the sand, so I would not overreact to it.

That said, given that DOJ will not indict a sitting president, refusal to impeach unless Senate conviction is certain lets a Senate Minority put a president above the law. https://t.co/Phf5WLMGBq
— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) March 11, 2019

Democratic @RepMikeQuigley urges his colleagues to have patience with calls for impeachment.

"We can't be seen to the American public as a single issue party, only going to try to impeach the President. … Let's get the complete body of information." https://t.co/U5Tx6yx5r4 pic.twitter.com/d40tybS29D
— CNN (@CNN) March 12, 2019

Rashida Tlaib says she's still pushing for impeachment.
AOC says "I happen to" have a different view than Pelosi.
Rep. Cohen: Trump is a 'blight' on 'humanity'

Nadler: "I'm not shutting the door" on impeachment but "we're a long way from facing that."

My piece on Dem debate: pic.twitter.com/br8EAzdiSa
— Manu Raju (@mkraju) March 12, 2019

Imagine how disenchanted young people will be if Democrats try to impeach Trump, and it blows up in our face, and hands the House & White House back to the Republicans in 2020?

Maybe we should be teaching young people that life is complicated and easy solutions are often a lie. https://t.co/oqb1cjYZd7
— John Aravosis 🇺🇸 (@aravosis) March 12, 2019

This is one of many misleading stories. The House is not YET ready to impeach. The Judiciary Committee is investigating and if they have sufficient evidence they will impeach. This is not a political game.https://t.co/b7HksW1PP5 via @nypost
— Richard W. Painter (@RWPUSA) March 12, 2019

I respect the anger toward Pelosi from the furthest fringes of the Trump/Russia obsessives. If you *really believed Trump is beholden to Putin, that Russia forces him to do things in its interests, that he colluded, outrage is the only rational response to her refusal to impeach pic.twitter.com/xPc2nrgnS3
— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) March 12, 2019

"It won't pass the Senate so don't impeach" now apply that logic to say HR 1 Or background checks…
— Oliver Willis (@owillis) March 12, 2019

Good point!

And reupping here that some POTUS advisers believe an – not only, but one – impetus for running again is that he could have criminal exposure in SDNY cases if he isn’t in office. https://t.co/p9a70YrHHX
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) March 20, 2019

Republican hypocrisy about the investigations of Trump

Republicans spent years investigating Benghazi and found nothing criminal.

Republicans would have had endless investigations of Clinton if she had won.

Democrats are doing what Republicans should have been doing. These investigations should have been started in 2017. Republicans want to cover up the facts and protect their lying, corrupt leader.

If you're watching GOP outrage at Dems demanding documents from the Trump admin, please check out my October 2016 piece about the GOP's plans to probe Hillary if she won. https://t.co/Oyn9AVWZEo
— Dave Weigel (@daveweigel) March 4, 2019

The Benghazi investigations lasted longer than Congressional probes into 9/11, Watergate, the JFK assassination & Pearl Harbor. They found nothing. Conversely, the leaders of Trump’s campaign are now felons, as are his lawyer, national security adviser, and foreign policy adviser https://t.co/bCwOPzRpko
— Brian Klaas (@brianklaas) March 3, 2019

81 subpoenas issued yesterday vs. 1200 in the Clinton White Water investigation. https://t.co/3v0GwU5VQ1
— Joyce Alene (@JoyceWhiteVance) March 5, 2019

As someone who was there, working for @GOPoversight, I can tell you this statement is 100% false. https://t.co/0wdvxvoNpU
— Kurt Bardella (@kurtbardella) March 5, 2019

time for everyone to dig out Trump's tweets on Benghazi, on Fast & Furious, etc. etc. https://t.co/e7VMBidMN7
— Glenn Kessler (@GlennKesslerWP) February 7, 2019

The man who led 2015’s infamous 11-hour Hillary Clinton hearing on Benghazi now calls hearings "utterly useless" https://t.co/mBLHBOG67m
— The Daily Beast (@thedailybeast) March 4, 2019

Lol because five years investigating Benghazi found so much on her. pic.twitter.com/zMWeqGNj7M
— bennyboy51773 🎯 (@bennyboy51773) February 27, 2019

Republicans who held 33 hearings on Benghazi complain that Cohen’s testimony was a waste of time https://t.co/ophUoAP3ne pic.twitter.com/FgS80BqmXl
— ThinkProgress (@thinkprogress) March 1, 2019

From 2011 – 2016 the Obama White House produced hundreds of thousands of documents to Congress on Solyndra, Benghazi, Fast and Furious, CAFE standards rule, Deep Water Horizon spill, ACA, ACA website, Clean Water Rule, and Ft Hood shooting. https://t.co/V3qA99TBxm
— Eric Schultz (@EricSchultz) March 5, 2019