Pelosi: It Doesn't Matter If Dems Lose The House Over Impeachment

[mystery-ak]

Pelosi: It Doesn't Matter If Dems Lose The House Over Impeachment
Beth Baumann

 @eb454
|
Posted: Sep 29, 2019 9:50 AM

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) sat down with Texas Tribune CEO Evan Smith for a Q&A session. One of the questions that came up was very political in nature: Isn't Pelosi worried about the Democrats losing their majority in the House in 2020, especially on the heals of her formal impeachment inquiry announcement.

"I wanna ask you, Speaker, heading into the next election cycle, do you have any anxiety at all, about anything we're talking about, or anything we're not talking about, impacting your ability to hold control of the House in 2020?" Smith asked, a clear reference to the Democrats' impeachment inquiry.

"It doesn't matter," she replied.

"It doesn't matter?" he asked.

more
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2019/09/29/pelosi-it-doesnt-matter-if-dems-lose-the-house-over-impeachment-n2553871

[Night Hides Not]

[dfwgator]

That tells me she wants the AOCs of her party taken out, even if it costs in the short-term.   That's why she's doing Impeachment, it's not about Trump.

[austingirl]

Mrs. Botox, it matters very much to me that the democommies lose the House in 2020 and I am praying everyday that the American voter will wake up and vote y'all out.

[berdie]

That tells me she wants the AOCs of her party taken out, even if it costs in the short-term.   That's why she's doing Impeachment, it's not about Trump.

That could very well be correct. But Nan won't be there to reap the benefit. She's getting older and goofy. I wonder if she would be that unselfish.

[Cyber Liberty]

This is just bullshit posturing.  Nobody thinks she doesn't care about the possibility of being kicked out of the Speaker's chair for the second time by virtue of losing a majority in the House.  No, she's putting on airs that this "Impeachment Inquiry" is the most important thing in the Nation, even more than her day job.

[libertybele]

That could very well be correct. But Nan won't be there to reap the benefit. She's getting older and goofy. I wonder if she would be that unselfish.

Actually it's a possible win/win situation for her.  IF Trump is not impeached she may get rid of some of the AOC's that have given her some headaches and IF Trump is impeached they could also try to take down Pence leaving her to become Madame President.

[edpc]

Actually it's a possible win/win situation for her.  IF Trump is not impeached she may get rid of some of the AOC's that have given her some headaches and IF Trump is impeached they could also try to take down Pence leaving her to become Madame President.

That’s not how impeachment works. The House can do it, but the Senate still needs to remove him, which they won’t. There’s no way there will be 67 votes for that.

[Chosen Daughter]

That’s not how impeachment works. The House can do it, but the Senate still needs to remove him, which they won’t. There’s no way there will be 67 votes for that.

Which makes a person say what is this about?  I think that Nancy wants Trump reelected.

[edpc]

Which makes a person say what is this about?  I think that Nancy wants Trump reelected.

It’s about them placating their base and hoping the people who stayed home or voted 3rd party in 2016 come back next year.

[aligncare]

That tells me she wants the AOCs of her party taken out, even if it costs in the short-term.   That's why she's doing Impeachment, it's not about Trump.

Well, if that’s the case then we ought to be thanking Ms. Pelosi.

[verga]

That tells me she wants the AOCs of her party taken out, even if it costs in the short-term.   That's why she's doing Impeachment, it's not about Trump.

The problem is the unintended consequences, which could lead to her own loss. The people of San Francisco could decide that she has had to many "missed shots" and send her packing. That is how AOC got in. If they get some Hip exciting upstart Nancy could be on the porch reminiscing with Harry Reid.

[sneakypete]

That tells me she wants the AOCs of her party taken out, even if it costs in the short-term.   That's why she's doing Impeachment, it's not about Trump.

@dfwgator

You may be right. I honestly can't think of a single reason for any Speaker of the House to not care about losing control over the House. So it must me something personal more than something political.

[Cyber Liberty]

@dfwgator

You may be right. I honestly can't think of a single reason for any Speaker of the House to not care about losing control over the House. So it must me something personal more than something political.

@sneakypete

I think she cares a great deal, probably more than about anything else in her life.  But...she has to lie and say she doesn't care, to make it sound like she's a superhero willing to dash herself upon the rocks below because she loves the country!

A regular Joan of Arc, that one.

[Snarknado]

@dfwgator

You may be right. I honestly can't think of a single reason for any Speaker of the House to not care about losing control over the House. So it must me something personal more than something political.

But there are plenty of reasons for her to SAY she doesn't care about losing the House. It's not like anyone should expect her to answer this (or any other) question truthfully.

[sneakypete]

But there are plenty of reasons for her to SAY she doesn't care about losing the House. It's not like anyone should expect her to answer this (or any other) question truthfully.

@Snarknado

I'm not even sure it is possible for her to answer any question truthfully. She didn't become Dim Speaker by being a girl scout.

[austingirl]

When is the floor vote in the House, Mrs. Botox? Oh, I guess you don't have the votes.

[libertybele]

That’s not how impeachment works. The House can do it, but the Senate still needs to remove him, which they won’t. There’s no way there will be 67 votes for that.

I wouldn't take that for granted.  There are 53 GOP Senators, 45 DEMS and 2 IND.  45 votes for sure from the DEMS for impeachment.  If the IND vote for impeachment then all that is needed is 20 GOP Senators that would have to defect - there have been reports that at least 35 GOP Senators would vote to impeach Trump. I think that it is a possibility.  Probable no, possible; absolutely!

[sneakypete]

I wouldn't take that for granted.  There are 53 GOP Senators, 45 DEMS and 2 IND.  45 votes for sure from the DEMS for impeachment.  If the IND vote for impeachment then all that is needed is 20 GOP Senators that would have to defect - there have been reports that at least 35 GOP Senators would vote to impeach Trump. I think that it is a possibility.  Probable no, possible; absolutely!

@libertybele

The day that happens may go down in the history books as the day the Second American Revolution began.

LOTS of people are tired and on their last nerve.

[PeteS in CA]

I'm sure the House members in "battleground" districts whose seats could be lost took great comfort in Miss Nancy's comment. About the only way Miss Nancy will leave the House is by her own choice or that of a much Higher Power.

[libertybele]

@libertybele

The day that happens may go down in the history books as the day the Second American Revolution began.

LOTS of people are tired and on their last nerve.

I get that, but under the Constitution there are rules for impeachment.  Whether or not we like the outcome, "we the people" voted for the RINO's ... if we disregard the outcome as a result of following the Constitution, then we truly have nothing.  What is terribly wrong is far too long we have ignored and side-stepped the Constitution.

[bilo]

I get that, but under the Constitution there are rules for impeachment.  Whether or not we like the outcome, "we the people" voted for the RINO's ... if we disregard the outcome as a result of following the Constitution, then we truly have nothing.  What is terribly wrong is far too long we have ignored and side-stepped the Constitution.

I understand your unease. It seems to me the corruption in DC runs a lot deeper than most recognize. Why didn't the Pubs go after all the corruption when it became obvious that the clinton crime family was shaking down people and countries when hillary was sect. of state? Why didn't the Pubs investigate obama when it was obvious he was using branches of the govt to target people and groups opposed to him? How many in the Pub party have become multi-millionaires while "serving in public office"?

We just learned romney's advisor is on the board of the gas company in the Ukraine that was paying hunter biden 50,000 a month.

I really don't see a lot of Pubs fighting back the way they should. Pelosi may be happy to be rid of the load mouthed commies in her party, but I think the Pubs want to get that outsider Trump out of the way so they can go back to their old ways.

[libertybele]

I understand your unease. It seems to me the corruption in DC runs a lot deeper than most recognize. Why didn't the Pubs go after all the corruption when it became obvious that the clinton crime family was shaking down people and countries when hillary was sect. of state? Why didn't the Pubs investigate obama when it was obvious he was using branches of the govt to target people and groups opposed to him? How many in the Pub party have become multi-millionaires while "serving in public office"?

We just learned romney's advisor is on the board of the gas company in the Ukraine that was paying hunter biden 50,000 a month.

I really don't see a lot of Pubs fighting back the way they should. Pelosi may be happy to be rid of the load mouthed commies in her party, but I think the Pubs want to get that outsider Trump out of the way so they can go back to their old ways.

Exactly.  The only one that 'they' hate worse than Trump is Cruz .... Both of the don't play very well with the country club set

[Fishrrman]

"Pelosi: It Doesn't Matter If Dems Lose The House Over Impeachment..."

Sounds good to me, Nan.
Lose away!

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

I understand your unease. It seems to me the corruption in DC runs a lot deeper than most recognize. Why didn't the Pubs go after all the corruption when it became obvious that the clinton crime family was shaking down people and countries when hillary was sect. of state? Why didn't the Pubs investigate obama when it was obvious he was using branches of the govt to target people and groups opposed to him? How many in the Pub party have become multi-millionaires while "serving in public office"?

We just learned romney's advisor is on the board of the gas company in the Ukraine that was paying hunter biden 50,000 a month.

I really don't see a lot of Pubs fighting back the way they should. Pelosi may be happy to be rid of the load mouthed commies in her party, but I think the Pubs want to get that outsider Trump out of the way so they can go back to their old ways.

FWIW, that would be Romney's 2012 campaign adviser.  I haven't seen any evidence of a current connection.

As far as fighting back, what's the old saying about what not to do when your enemy is making a mistake?