The firing of F.B.I. Director James Comey is still reverberating the walls of Washington, DC. Democrats believe this is a prime opening to attack the administration on the grounds that Comey was fired because he was getting too close to Trump in the Russia investigation. Republicans are scoffing at that notion (well, most of them) and continue to defend their president.

However, at least one Democrat says the threat of impeachment should stand as a deterrent for Trump to follow the law:

Democratic leaders aren’t calling for the impeachment of President Donald Trump.

But they’re getting closer.

To one Democratic congressman, the president’s decision to fire FBI Director James Comey reminded him of the “doomsday clock,” a symbol that warns about the likelihood of nuclear war.

“We should maybe have an impeachment clock,” Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wis., said on Wednesday. “And if we did, I think yesterday moved us about an hour closer to having that need.”

Pocan said he had thought Democrats in the House of Representatives needed to use the threat of impeachment as a “tool” to make the administration follow the law.

“I would argue this has got to still be on the table as an option, especially if, indeed, there was obstruction of justice by the firing of the FBI director,” said Pocan, first vice chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

Of course, impeachment would require that Democrats regain control of the House in 2018, which is not outside the realm of possibility. Even still, they’d need enough votes to actually bring impeachment proceedings which could be tough.

The big question here is what the actual impeachment would be based on. So far, there is no conclusive wrongdoing, only speculation on the part of Democrats that Trump fired Comey to stifle the probe into Russian election meddling. Comey himself, however, penned a letter to staff saying it was well within the President’s power to hire or fire a FBI Director at any time and for basically any cause.

For now, impeachment remains a hollow threat from the party out of power.


  1. Kelly-Anne on CNN yesterday: “Trump did not ask Comey if he was under investigation.”

    Trump today: “I asked Comey if I was under investigation.

    Kelly-Anne yesterday: “Trump acted on the recommendation from Sessions and Rosenstein.”

    Trump today: “I did not act on the recommendation from Sessions and Rosenstein.”

    Why can’t the Trump team get their stories straight? Is it just that Trump is too dumb to stick to the narrative they’ve agreed on?

    Yikes. This incompetence is bizarre.

    • One thing is for sure, if momma Trump ever took little Donnie by the hand and said to him ” if you always tell the truth, you can never be caught in a lie”. Or maybe she did and he was not smart enough to understand the concept.
      By the way, when I first got involved with this site, I thought it was a nonbiased political blog that might offer some interesting insights. Now I realise how wrong that was. This blog is written by two of the most opinionated right wing but jobs since Breitbart.

      • Its called free speech.

        It Looks like honesty is in the eye of the beholder. I’ve read articles that I’ve completely disagreed with. But I like the knowledge of the writers so I’ve stuck with this blog.

        Hard core Dems tend to cut and run. They can’t stand that others have a different opinion.

        • No cut, no run, you will notice that I post under my real name. I am a lifelong Democrat, not ashamed of any of my political ideas or ideals. Freedom of speech does not extend to cover lies told by the man who is supposed to lead the free world, and those who speak for him. If you are talking about my reference to the authors of this blog, you are right, they have the right and freedom to express any point of view, political or otherwise, that they chose. I was speaking about the honesty of their presentation. The presentation of their site led me to believe that they were unbiased, and sought to present current events in a way that encouraged discussion and differing viewpoints. After following them for about 8 or 9 months, I think that their bias is pretty clear. Also, it is interesting to note that they do not publish under their own names either. You can be much bolder, and play fast and loose with facts when posting under a pseudonym, after all you can always make up another identity if this one gets into trouble. Your own name, however, sticks with you requiring you to be able to defend what you say.

          • At least you didn’t cut and run. Your right on that point. Congrats. That says a lot about you.

            99.99% of those anti Trump on Twitter run from any type of controversy. They won’t hesitate to bash Trump but can’t stand to be questioned.

            I still? don’t think the articles are necessarily biased. I believe they just don’t lean in the particular direction that you want them to go in.

            I say that even though a writer once said he’d read my garbage. Now that was a real ego booster. Good thing I’m 73 and it didn’t bother me.

            Anyway, I’ve thought from the get go that Trump just stirs the pot with the media. They hate him and the feeling is mutual. The way he tweets/timing of firings has got to be a distraction. Nobody is that foolish when it comes to the political fallout. Nobody.

    • Yeah. You know the administration is desperate if they brought Kelly-Anne out of the closet to confuse things.

Comments are closed.