If Democratic leadership is truly serious about a both approach, I think they should first start heavily and only with Epstein files and only branch out from there as things get major coverage for 2 major reasons:

First is that there’s MAJOR bipartisan support for this and will ultimately lead to isolating certain officials and supporters, giving Democrats the moral high ground in other branching investigations IF they can land convictions and legislation. I’d like to hope that there are at least a few Republicans who are disgusted with their party as a whole (ie Thomas Massie) and are being backed into a corner with campaign finances, and this could free a few votes for later bills or a Senate convictions/removals.

Secondly, i have zero doubt those investigations will lead to certain billionaires being questioned and potentially lead to actual trials and accountability. And if progressives play their questions right, could lead to a public outcry for more campaign finance AND News coverage reform.

Meanwhile, they should pass single issue, high polling bills like tariff reform and ending the Iran conflict. Then once some dust settles a bit and there’s the inevitable Epstein tie-in, publicly investigate corporate pricing/inflation.

It’s not just those 2, it’s any of the Rotating Villains. Here’s a comment i made about Dem senators when they voted against the War Powers resolution ICE funding votes after the public executions in January https://lemmy.world/comment/22588355

To summarize, it’s a failure on leadership, and the whip if any Democrats break ranks, then also those Democrats. Here’s the list from that vote:

The Senate Democratic leader is Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) The Senate Democratic Whip is Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL)

The Eight Senate Democrats/Independents who voted in favor were: Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL) Sen. Angus King (I-ME) Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-NH) Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV) Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-NV) Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA)

The House did not have enough votes to defeat it, and all voted against but here are those leaders too. The House Democratic leader is Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) The House Democratic Minority Whip is Rep. Katherine Clark (D-MA) "

May their phone lines know no peace, as ours hadn’t in the lead up to this election.

Just to clarify, this law becomes active January 1st. The new congress doesn’t get sworn in until January 3rd.

As others have stated, it’s being projected that Dems take back the House and possibly the Senate, which could see a new law get signed in that reappropriates funds back into social safety net programs, though it then goes to the dipshit in command for a signature. If he vetoes, it’ll require 2/3rds of both chambers of Congress to override, which is a much taller order.

So as you are stating, people need to realize what’s fully at stake and vote. There is a pathway to some form of normalcy, 2/3rds is … possible.

Yeah, last i checked on 270 to win, Dems would need to win some VERY improbable Senate races to pull off the 67 needed to convict and remove both. Possible, just improbable.

If they don’t reach the 67 needed, they need to save any impeachment hearings because people are voting based on economy and having impeachment hearings will come off as out of touch, like the last time.

Instead they should focus on investigating and releasing the Epstein files, as there seems to be bipartisan support for that, and once fully released, test public sentiment on impeachment. That may be the only way to get enough votes, but the end result would be a Vance presidency, unless they can somehow tie him to it as well, which is unlikely.

Assuming all seats are filled and are present, 218 in the House to impeach, 67 in the Senate to convict and remove.