So what do you all think? The momentum certainly seems to be there, and the crime is pretty dang clear also. We went from roughly 130 Congress members supporting an impeachment inquiry a week ago to over 220. In a week! This, of course, includes the one indispensable Congress member, the Speaker herself. She went from doing everything she could to tamp down enthusiasm among her caucus for impeachment to supporting it, which is a big deal. So do you think impeachment will happen? When? And what then? Pelosi seems to want to keep it focused (even limited) to this particular whistleblower complaint about the attempted shakedown of Ukraine, and its associated coverup. I can see the upside of that - it's a much easier thing to understand than much of the Mueller report (which only a small portion of the public ever read), and sometimes less is more. Simple is good. And strike while the iron is hot and all that. I get that. But part of me sees an upside to trying to find more as well. With the Senate unlikely to vote for removal (at least at this point), it could still be a win for the country if a clear majority of the public becomes convinced that Trump SHOULD be removed, even if he isn't. (With Clinton, a clear majority was always opposed, both before and after the inquiry.) But they may need more than Ukraine for that to happen. While a good percentage of the country may understand why this incident alone (and associated coverup) IS enough for impeachment, a good percentage may not. And then we're just at odds with competing narratives again. Might it be better to try to get more? The examples of obstruction contained in the Mueller report that Congress punted on (but that Mueller pretty clearly wanted them NOT to punt on) would be one avenue. The legwork has largely been done, and it may be easier with an official impeachment inquiry to compel the testimony of someone like Don McGahn. (Even Lewandowski, for all his bluster, essentially admitted that Trump attempted to use him to obstruct justice - he was quick to add "and so what?" - but that's not a legal defense. And he also looked pretty pathetic when Congress finally wised up and started using the professional counsel - they should keep that in mind for the future!) There are also other avenues being investigated but currently stonewalled and at various stages of court fights as we speak. Timing is important, and I'm not sure how long these various fights will take to resolve. But what if Congress DID get hold of his taxes and could show tax evasion? That's a simple thing for most Americans to understand. Ditto if they could find money laundering for the Russians (or others). Or could they show that Trump has been funneling TAXPAYER money into his own pockets via his golf resorts, foreign government money into his own pockets via his hotels, etc.? That's also pretty simple to understand and would probably tick a lot of people off to realize that their tax dollars were being funneled into his pockets, (and his family's pockets), when that's not supposed to happen and the Constitution expressly forbids it. It wouldn't surprise me at all if Trump were guilty of all that, but of course that may take a long time to prove, even if they did get his financial records. And I'm not sure how close they are to getting them in the first place. So what do you think? Press forward with this Ukraine incident alone? Or decide that that wouldn't be enough to convince a solid majority of Americans of Trump's unfitness for office and expand the probe? As of noon on Sept. 27, I'm not sure. Whichever way they go, I think it's vital to have televised hearings, witnesses, etc. Support for Nixon's impeachment went from minority to majority after those televised hearings. It's important that people understand how corrupt this man is. And use the professional counsels! They're much more effective, usually, than the Congress members themselves.