The 3 times impeachment happened in American history led to either the target getting primaried and never running for president again(Johnson), resigning with the threat of it (Nixon) or watching your VP lose a presidential election to a moron who said he would “restore honor and dignity to the White House” after you…

That would be great.  I would hang the threat of impeachment over his head and then pull the trigger as we get into the election cycle.  Watching Trump attempt what Hillary did with the Benghazi hearings would be hilarious.  

The GOP absolutely have a long-term plan, but I disagree with your interpretation of what that was. I can tell you without uncertainty that if the shoe was on the other foot (and in Newt’s case, it absolutely was) and it was Gingrich/Hillary not Pelosi/Trump, he would have pulled that impeachment trigger so fast and…

It’s not just the right thing to do, but it’s something they all swore in an oath to uphold.

It sounds like more of an observation of the House Dems strategy than an endorsement.

If it doesn’t lead to impeachment, it will look like you’re investigating for the sake of investigating.  I think it would be a bad look to have all of this evidence and still believe that impeaching Trump wouldn’t be worth it.

They aren’t duped into believing in impeachment proceedings. They just know that even if you fail to convict, history has shown that the pursuing party has benefited from it.

A quick review of impeachment in American history does not support this theory at all.

Civility!  And to heal our dividend country /s.

We still got 8 years of a draft dodger leading us into 2 of America’s longest, most poorly planned wars of all time.

You didn’t refute a single point they made.  They are right, you know.  And Mueller actually agrees with them on impeachment.

that’s the beauty of a well-timed impeachment: it starts in the chamber that has a lot of time on their hands while the ones running for president are free to campaign and will show up to vote to convict.  It will also tie Trump up who has been campaigning for 2+ years already for 2020.  

The history of impeachment in America refutes your hypothesis.  I think it would be a net positive if planned right.

Congresswoman Tlaib literally yelled “impeach the motherfucker” during her victory party in 2018.  Impeachment was one of the key issues that led to the blue wave.

You: where have I defended piracy?

How are you going to actually tie the entire caucus of republican senators (outside of Burr/Jordan) as a direct defender of Trump without getting their known vote during an impeachment trial?

Interesting strawman, but I am for impeachment. The argument from the anti-impeachment crowd is that it will divide the country (Pelosi) or that it will lose voters in the 2020 presidential election if the senate fails to convict which I have shown in other posts to not match our country’s history of impeachment. 

He would not. At all. It’s the reason why a never Trump contingent existed in the first place. DJT is incredibly charismatic and that is a centerpiece of his leadership style and gives him the ability to do what he does. Pence does not have that.

Absolutely.

Pence doesn’t have that Teflon shield that Trump has.  They are not the same person at all.