Nancy Pelosi’s Impeachment Charge and Why it Will Fail!

Last updated on January 3, 2023

EDITED to mention Nancy’s interest in machine guns.

What the hell is the matter with Nancy Pelosi? And I don’t mean her helmet hair.. And why is she attempting to destroy a President, and risk civil war with impeachment? President Donald Trump wasn’t there, didn’t know what was going on, and had no way to control the rioting at the Capital, yet she impulsively threw down an article of impeachment against him. No thought, no investigation, and no sensible reason.

She led with fear. Fear of the suddenly very active right, fear that her hundreds of Capitol police could not protect her, fear that the public would find out she was in charge of those ineffective police, and most of all, fear that somehow Trump would stay in office another term.

Basing actions on fear makes her unfit to be the Speaker of the House.

EDIT: Right after I published this, I happened to see a tweet for the Geller Report that apparently Nancy Pelosi was behind the crazy request of 25000 troops that turned Wash DC into a militarized zone this week.

She also requested machine guns. Because, after all, her life was important, too. Right?

Here are Pelosi’s impeachment charges leveled against President Donald Trump. (there’s only one.)

Nancy Pelosi’s speech on Jan 13 on the House floor must have made her feel terrific! Vogue says she even wore her same impeachment power suit! Psychologically, being angry and aggressive makes us feel temporarily more powerful.  And she has been trying to nail Trump for 4 years, especially because the first charge of impeachment didn’t stick.

She laid out her weak case for impeachment, but forgot to show any evidence, or leave time for a defense. She never even calls President Trump by name. (Say his name, Nancy!)

I tear apart Pelosi’s January 7 impeachment speech against Trump

First she quotes the Bible, then Lincoln.

Oh, I have to take issue with this bit right away:

We know we experienced the insurrection that violated the sanctity of the people’s capital and attempted to overturn the duly recorded will of the American people.

No, Congresswoman, we DON’T know that. An angry mob, some in cosplay, some just recording (lots of media!) and a very few who attacked the police. Insurrection means taking over the government. Not quite.

(About 170 protesters have been stalked, charged, and made public by the FBI so far. Main charge? Violating curfew and disorderly conduct. Some were arrested, but not charged, and still might appear on your record. In other words, the FBI wants to hamstring you from ever getting a job again.)

Also, “sanctity” of the Capitol, Nancy? True, breaking in was violent and we all disavow that. The 2 thefts, your laptop and lectern, also illegal and wrong. And every American would agree that the principle of Democracy was outraged by illegally entering federal property and possibly intruding on the democratic process. (For all of 5 hours.)

But I’m pretty sure Congress knows what most of the country does not — that the Capitol edifice itself, although historical and honorable, is not holy ground. Our forefathers made sure that democratic process would be OPEN to the public, and many of the buildings are open 360 days a year, including the Capitol. Walk right in! Free for all, throngs of schoolkids and visitors. It would have been open Jan 6, too, if not for the lockdowns for the last 10 months. I still remember them…

(Whisper in Nancy’s ear: Would have been swell for Congress to make sure our election process is ALSO open and transparent.)

Then she throws the knife at Trump, without, of course, using his name:

And we know that the president of the United States incited this insurrection, this armed rebellion, against our common country. He must go. He is a clear and present danger to the nation that we all love.

We know it? Isn’t that thinking past the sale, as Scott Adams would say? The news articles quote

“incite and insurrection”. But what about the clear and present danger part? That’s a famous movie! It’s also a legal term, established in 1919 when we were at war. It means that the speaker is not protected by the First Amendment, because those words will put the entire country at danger of failing imminently.

Is that what you meant to say, Nancy? Our whole country is at risk because our President gave a speech? That’s a little overboard.

Legal analysts have been taking stabs to make a case with “inciting the insurrection”, but have ignored the “clear and present danger,” probably because they couldn’t keep a straight face. :) It makes both accusations look frivolous, Ms. Pelosi.

Pelosi adds that Trump tried to “repeal reality.” This would have been an important place to add details, but nope. She sails on.

And then came that day of fire we all experienced.

Were there any fires at the Capitol breach?

No.

Pelosi was obviously dazed and confused. She should NOT have said fire in crowded Congress. The police used tear gas and smoke grenades against the crowd.

But fire sounds more dramatic and out of control, doesn’t it?

Pelosi continues:

Those insurrectionists were not patriots. They were not part of a political base to be catered to and managed. They were domestic terrorists, and justice must prevail.

She has moved on from President Trump, and is calling everyone at the protest — 50,000 people– a domestic terrorist. I wasn’t there, but my feelings are hurt, because I wished I could be there. Gosh, do you think this will make the right to assemble (part of the First Amendment) harder for everyone now?

Absolutely, some people weren’t peaceful, but stop trying to tar the whole crowd with catchy phrases like “domestic terrorists.”

Oops, too late. Just added it to my bio.

They were sent here by the president with words such as a cry to, “Fight like hell.” Words matter.

I’m pretty sure everyone at the march volunteered. Trump did not proscript nor send anyone. It was a rally, a party President Trump invited people to. “Be there, will be wild!” Be there, or be square!

Note: this is the only time Pelosi offers any details about why she thinks Trump might be responsible for the rioters, and inciting. She says that (an unnamed president) said Fight like hell.

You can see it in context here. She’s turned the impeachment of a president into Word Search.

Nancy Pelosi brings up the Constitution a few times. She asks Congress to search their souls.

Is the president’s war on democracy in keeping with the Constitution? Were his words and insurrectionary mob a high crime and misdemeanor?

A war on democracy? Did you see those clowns? Angry, sure, but no one had a weapon, and no one made demands and it’s all too stupid for words.

And she’s calling the whole Capitol crowd names again, like insurrectionists, instead of citizens with a right to protest and assemble peacefully.

Pelosi confides: “We know our country is divided.” And you are thinking this is the best solution, Madam? Oh. My. Gah.

She ends by describing her personal attributes and quoting Kennedy.

Media analysis of Impeachment charge: What are the odds it will succeed?

ABC reacts, and writes,Trump impeachment affirms power of words and consequences

This sounds like a woke parent, doesn’t it?.But they got it right: it’s all about semantics in Congress, since the President didn’t take any physical actions to point to.

To those who have grown used to and perhaps weary from watching his speeches, it was rather typical of Trump. Last Wednesday’s collection of meandering falsehoods, generalized complaints, vague political threats and outright lies may have been forgotten if not for what happened next.

So…even with ABC’s obvious bias here, the reporter found nothing provocative or inciting in Trump’s speech at the Capitol.

NBC had a legal analyst explain Pelosi’s accusation that Trump’s words were inciting, or could lead to insurrection.

But it would be difficult to convict Trump in a conventional criminal trial for his speech, even if the Senate convicts him.

Punishable incitement must “specifically advocate” for listeners to take unlawful action, give the crowd detailed instructions on how to break the law or enlist the crowd to carry out a criminal act, the court has said.

And continues:

A speaker is not automatically liable for the acts of anyone who was at an intended peaceful demonstration. Rather, the speaker must have the intent to engage in the criminal conduct.

Some will argue that Trump’s intent was evident in his use of words like “strength” and “fight.”

At this point I burst out laughing. You go through an hour and 20 minute speech with a fine-toothed comb and all you found were 2 random words that might mean something, if taken out of context!? :)

Watch the New York Times’ head explode

I stopped reading the Times earlier this year, when it became painfully obvious that they were turning every piece of news into a Trump bash. I wanted to see their analysis of the impeachment charge, however.

Noah Weiland writes:

…this potential impeachment is taking place at the scene of its charge: the Capitol, invaded by a pro-Trump mob incited by the president, who minutes earlier had evoked violent imagery as he implored an angry crowd to “fight” the election results.

There isn’t one neutral word in here. Nothing is true: the timeline, the actions described, nothing. NBC and ABC used legal analysts: Noah got some quick soundbites from the next cubicle over. The new NYT is a travesty of real journalism.

This made me laugh out loud!

President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr. said on Monday that he had consulted with lawmakers about the possibility they could “bifurcate” the proceedings, with half of each day spent on the trial and half on confirming his Cabinet and other nominees.

Can’t you just see Biden: Please sir, may I have half a day to set up my spiffy new office? And I love his use of bifurcate instead of halfsies. :)

Quote from the actual article of impeachment:

“In all this, President Trump gravely endangered the security of the United States and its institutions of government,” the article reads. “He threatened the integrity of the democratic system, interfered with the peaceful transition of power, and imperiled a coequal branch of government.”

We need to decapitate this ludicrous threat ASAP.

Related posts:

Trump’s Tweets & Speech Did not Incite Insurrection! (Or Resurrection) Easter cartoon on the birthers.