Impeachment

[Dos Equis]

The whistle blower is just a pawn. He’ll be tossed aside one no longer needed. Biden, on the other hand, is the Democratic front runner for president.


Schiff just underestimated how prepared the Republicans were. Everyone of them came out strong. The breakout star of the proceedings was a Republican Congresswoman, Elise Stapanik.

If this goes to the Senate where the Republicans are actually in control, it’s going to be a complete train wreck for the Democrats.

I agree overall.  Yes Eric Ciaramella is a pawn, but I think having him testify in the Senate would blow the lid off this thing.  He will either have to (1) plead the Fifth or (2) say exactly who gave him (bad) intel about the phone call, which I think we have figured out was likely LTC "Don't call me Mr." Vindman.  In which case, Vindman perjured himself. 

In the end, this is going to blow up in Democrats' faces.  They should have just focused on running better candidates and coming up with better policy ideas. 

[Thin Lizzy]

My understanding is that if the House impeaches Trump, the Senate has to take it up.

I’m saying Congress doesn’t vote and it never goes to the Senate.

[Dos Equis]

Watch it drop right when the IG report is released. 

Trump impeachment report could drop next week: Democrat
AFP•November 25, 2019

Washington (AFP) - US impeachment investigators said Monday they could present their report of presidential wrongdoing as early as next week but do not rule out calling new witnesses in the case against Donald Trump.

The three panels heading the probe have been preparing a file to deliver to the committee that will consider whether to draft articles of impeachment against the president.

It will be sent to the Judiciary Committee soon after Congress returns from the Thanksgiving recess, beginning next Tuesday, House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff told colleagues in a letter.

"The evidence of wrongdoing and misconduct by the president that we have gathered to date is clear and hardly in dispute," said Schiff, who has delivered searing condemnations of Trump's behavior and the Republicans' defenses of the president.

"What is left to us now is to decide whether this behavior is compatible with the office of the presidency, and whether the constitutional process of impeachment is warranted."

Schiff presided over two weeks of dramatic public hearings that he said uncovered a "massive amount of evidence in short order," despite efforts to obstruct the investigation by Trump and his administration.

It "conclusively shows" that Trump conditioned a White House meeting with Ukraine's new president and critical US military assistance on Ukraine announcing "sham, politically-motivated investigations that would help President Trump's 2020 reelection campaign," he said.

The committees "do not foreclose the possibility of further depositions or hearings," signaling they could seek to have more witnesses testify, Schiff added.

The White House and State Department have refused to turn over documents seen as crucial to the inquiry, or allow potential witnesses with firsthand knowledge of the Ukraine pressure campaign to testify.

They include White House acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

Schiff said such refusal to comply with subpoenas or testimony requests could lead the Judiciary Committee to consider an article of impeachment based on obstruction of Congress, in addition to the charges referring to Trump's underlying misconduct.

Trump has repeatedly denounced the process in the Democratic-led House of Representatives as a "witch hunt."

If Trump is impeached in the House, the process shifts to a trial in the Senate, where a Republican majority appears unlikely to oust him from office.

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-impeachment-report-could-drop-next-week-democrat-221631499.html

[Dos Equis]

Which lenses do Republicans view through? Perhaps it is the Republicans who aren't seeing the impeachment with clarity.

I don't recall Republicans asking the witnesses many questions. They spent most of their 5 minutes, stating their preconceived opinions. IMO

How the Senate votes is up to the them. When the House votes to impeach Trump, the Senate will be required to try him. Senate impeachment rules seem a bit more stringent than those of the House specially with regards to witnesses.

Senate Impeachment Rules

The Senate shall have power to compel the attendance of witnesses, to enforce obedience to its orders, mandates, writs, precepts, and judgments, to preserve order, and to punish in a summary way contempts of and disobedience to its authority, orders, mandates, writs, precepts, or judgments, and to make all lawful orders, rules and regulations, which it may deem essential or conducive to the ends of justice.  And the Sergeant-at-arms, under the direction the Senate, may employ such aid and assistance as may be necessary to enforce, executive, and carry into effect the lawful orders, mandates, writs, and precepts of the Senate.
  

What?  You should pull up clips of the hearing.  They asked pointed questions that blew up each and every witness. 

[JustPlaneJane]

I’m absolutely 100% sure that I want this Impeachment farce to go to the Senate now.

Let President Donald Trump expose the disgusting Democrat scum that pollutes Washington

[Grape Ape]

Which lenses do Republicans view through? Perhaps it is the Republicans who aren't seeing the impeachment with clarity.

I don't recall Republicans asking the witnesses many questions. They spent most of their 5 minutes, stating their preconceived opinions. IMO

How the Senate votes is up to the them. When the House votes to impeach Trump, the Senate will be required to try him. Senate impeachment rules seem a bit more stringent than those of the House specially with regards to witnesses.

Senate Impeachment Rules

The Senate shall have power to compel the attendance of witnesses, to enforce obedience to its orders, mandates, writs, precepts, and judgments, to preserve order, and to punish in a summary way contempts of and disobedience to its authority, orders, mandates, writs, precepts, or judgments, and to make all lawful orders, rules and regulations, which it may deem essential or conducive to the ends of justice.  And the Sergeant-at-arms, under the direction the Senate, may employ such aid and assistance as may be necessary to enforce, executive, and carry into effect the lawful orders, mandates, writs, and precepts of the Senate.
  

If watched, the Republican lens was one looking for evidence, not hearsay, or presumption.  They only found the latter.

Also, the point stands that they must realize they haven’t turned 20 senate republicans.   Also, the Senate isn’t “required” to have a trial:

The Constitution does not by its express terms direct the Senate to try an impeachment. In fact, it confers on the Senate "the sole power to try,” which is a conferral of exclusive constitutional authority and not a procedural command. The Constitution couches the power to impeach in the same terms: it is the House’s “sole power.” The House may choose to impeach or not, and one can imagine an argument that the Senate is just as free, in the exercise of its own “sole power,” to decline to try any impeachment that the House elects to vote.

The current rules governing Senate practice and procedure do not pose an insurmountable problem for this maneuver. Senate leadership can seek to have the rules “reinterpreted” at any time by the device of seeking a ruling of the chair on the question, and avoiding a formal revision of the rule that would require supermajority approval. The question presented in some form would be whether, under the relevant rules, the Senate is required to hold an impeachment “trial” fully consistent with current rules—or even any trial at all. A chair’s ruling in the affirmative would be subject to being overturned by a majority, not two-thirds, vote.

[Dos Equis]

You don't say?

House Democrat backs down from impeachment: 'I don't see the value of kicking him out of office'
by Tim Pearce
November 25, 2019

Democratic Rep. Brenda Lawrence of Michigan now favors censuring President Trump after backing impeachment proceedings over allegations that he withheld military aid from Ukraine for his personal benefit.

Lawrence appeared on the Michigan radio show No BS News Hour with host Charlie LeDuff on Sunday to discuss the impeachment process in the House. Lawrence told LeDuff, to his surprise, that she does not support removing the president from office and that she would ask her caucus to censure him instead.

"We are so close to an election. I will tell you, sitting here knowing how divided this country is, I don't see the value of taking him out of office," Lawrence said. "I do see the value of putting down a marker saying his behavior is not acceptable."

She continued, "I want to censure. I want it on the record that the House of Representatives did their job and they told this president and any president coming behind him that this is unacceptable behavior and, under our Constitution, we will not allow it."

Lawrence also said she would have a "discussion with the party and with the caucus" to censure Trump instead of impeaching him.

Her comments stand in contrast to her Oct. 4 interview with Sirius XM host Dean Obeidallah, during which she appeared to back impeaching Trump over the allegations.

"I feel strongly that for my legacy, for my time in history, sitting here at this table with an oath of office to protect this country, to protect the democracy of the United States of America, I cannot sit silent, that I must move forward with [impeachment] because this is egregious," Lawrence said.

Lawrence represents a heavily Democratic district that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton won with a roughly 60% margin in the 2016 presidential election. The district has not been represented by a Republican since 1948.

House Democrats launched impeachment proceedings against Trump after a CIA whistleblower filed a complaint alleging that the president leveraged United States military aid to pressure Ukraine into launching investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden, with the intent of harming Biden’s 2020 presidential run.

Reports have suggested that the anonymous whistleblower is 33-year-old CIA analyst Eric Ciaramella but have not yet been confirmed. Ciaramella was Ukraine director on the National Security Council during the end of the Obama administration and remained there during the early months of the Trump administration when he was briefly acting senior director for European and Russian affairs.

The Washington Examiner reported that Ciaramella is now a deputy national intelligence officer for Russia and Eurasia on the National Intelligence Council, reporting to the director of national intelligence.

Lawrence's office did not immediately respond to the Washington Examiner's request for comment.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/house-democrat-backs-down-from-impeachment-i-dont-see-the-value-of-kicking-him-out-of-office

[SOMEPARTS]

I assume by Congress, you mean the House. Congress includes the House and the Senate. Therefore, the House will vote to or not to impeach Trump. As I understand it, the intelligence committee will decide whether to move the impeachment to the judicial committee who will draft the articles of impeachment At this point, unless there is some other committee that takes it up the House will vote to impeach Trump or not to.

Unfortunately, there are other things at play. Namely, the 2020 Presidential election. Chances are, the Senate is going to rule against impeachment. If Trump gains the sympathy of the voters, he stands a better chance of being reelected. If the Democratic dominated House ends up looking like a lynch mob, Trump could be with us for another four years. Oh Lord!

This has already happened, dems just don't know until the polls tell them.

[Dos Equis]

Watch it drop right when the IG report is released. 

Trump impeachment report could drop next week: Democrat
AFP•November 25, 2019

Washington (AFP) - US impeachment investigators said Monday they could present their report of presidential wrongdoing as early as next week but do not rule out calling new witnesses in the case against Donald Trump.

The three panels heading the probe have been preparing a file to deliver to the committee that will consider whether to draft articles of impeachment against the president.

It will be sent to the Judiciary Committee soon after Congress returns from the Thanksgiving recess, beginning next Tuesday, House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff told colleagues in a letter.

"The evidence of wrongdoing and misconduct by the president that we have gathered to date is clear and hardly in dispute," said Schiff, who has delivered searing condemnations of Trump's behavior and the Republicans' defenses of the president.

"What is left to us now is to decide whether this behavior is compatible with the office of the presidency, and whether the constitutional process of impeachment is warranted."

Schiff presided over two weeks of dramatic public hearings that he said uncovered a "massive amount of evidence in short order," despite efforts to obstruct the investigation by Trump and his administration.

It "conclusively shows" that Trump conditioned a White House meeting with Ukraine's new president and critical US military assistance on Ukraine announcing "sham, politically-motivated investigations that would help President Trump's 2020 reelection campaign," he said.

The committees "do not foreclose the possibility of further depositions or hearings," signaling they could seek to have more witnesses testify, Schiff added.

The White House and State Department have refused to turn over documents seen as crucial to the inquiry, or allow potential witnesses with firsthand knowledge of the Ukraine pressure campaign to testify.

They include White House acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

Schiff said such refusal to comply with subpoenas or testimony requests could lead the Judiciary Committee to consider an article of impeachment based on obstruction of Congress, in addition to the charges referring to Trump's underlying misconduct.

Trump has repeatedly denounced the process in the Democratic-led House of Representatives as a "witch hunt."

If Trump is impeached in the House, the process shifts to a trial in the Senate, where a Republican majority appears unlikely to oust him from office.

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-impeachment-report-could-drop-next-week-democrat-221631499.html

Yep.

House Judiciary Committee announces first impeachment hearing, invites Trump to attend
The president has complained that he's been deprived of due process by the Democrats
Nov. 26, 2019
By Dareh Gregorian

The House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday announced it will hold its first public impeachment hearing next week, and invited President Donald Trump and his lawyers "to participate."

"I am hopeful that you and your counsel will opt to participate in the Committee's hearing, consistent with the rules of decorum and with the solemn nature before us," Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler said in a letter announcing the hearing.

Nadler said the hearing, which will focus on "Constitutional Grounds for Presidential Impeachment," will take place on Dec. 4.

Nadler said the hearing comes as the inquiry enters "a new phase."

"Our first task is to explore the framework put in place to respond to serious allegations of impeachable misconduct like those against President Trump," Nadler said, adding that Trump, who has complained that the House is not giving him due process, "has a choice to make: he can take this opportunity to be represented in the impeachment hearings, or he can stop complaining about the process. I hope that he chooses to participate in the inquiry, directly or through counsel, as other Presidents have done before him."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry/house-judiciary-committee-announces-first-impeachment-hearing-invites-trump-attend-n1091861?cid=sm_npd_ms_fb_ma&fbclid=IwAR2UsK2lwCXxL4brjBT_qet9z0qxDeBpVu0-iAiebyvvHcVLLTngd6Jp8iI&fbclid=IwAR2f46aDOxDDZUMHf48GCQwdUly5lb8wX9n55eiNkmcc4w8H76K63QqoWTA

[Moontrane]

Yep.

House Judiciary Committee announces first impeachment hearing, invites Trump to attend
The president has complained that he's been deprived of due process by the Democrats
Nov. 26, 2019
By Dareh Gregorian

The House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday announced it will hold its first public impeachment hearing next week, and invited President Donald Trump and his lawyers "to participate."

"I am hopeful that you and your counsel will opt to participate in the Committee's hearing, consistent with the rules of decorum and with the solemn nature before us," Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler said in a letter announcing the hearing.

Nadler said the hearing, which will focus on "Constitutional Grounds for Presidential Impeachment," will take place on Dec. 4.

Nadler said the hearing comes as the inquiry enters "a new phase."

"Our first task is to explore the framework put in place to respond to serious allegations of impeachable misconduct like those against President Trump," Nadler said, adding that Trump, who has complained that the House is not giving him due process, "has a choice to make: he can take this opportunity to be represented in the impeachment hearings, or he can stop complaining about the process. I hope that he chooses to participate in the inquiry, directly or through counsel, as other Presidents have done before him."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry/house-judiciary-committee-announces-first-impeachment-hearing-invites-trump-attend-n1091861?cid=sm_npd_ms_fb_ma&fbclid=IwAR2UsK2lwCXxL4brjBT_qet9z0qxDeBpVu0-iAiebyvvHcVLLTngd6Jp8iI&fbclid=IwAR2f46aDOxDDZUMHf48GCQwdUly5lb8wX9n55eiNkmcc4w8H76K63QqoWTA

They’re considering thinking about contemplating if they should wonder about a resolution. 

[Grape Ape]

Looks like you have a point.

Senate leadership can seek to have the rules “reinterpreted” at any time by the device of seeking a ruling of the chair on the question, and avoiding a formal revision of the rule that would require supermajority approval. The question presented in some form would be whether, under the relevant rules, the Senate is required to hold an impeachment “trial” fully consistent with current rules—or even any trial at all. A chair’s ruling in the affirmative would be subject to being overturned by a majority, not two-thirds, vote.

Maybe it will come down to the will of the people.

Of course, this might never come to pass. If Trump were to be impeached, the evidence for his removal from office could turn out to be so overwhelming that it would be politically untenable for McConnell to adopt this course or impossible for him to hold his caucus in line. These outcomes are particularly likely if public opinion at the time swings decisively against the president. Or alternatively, one might hope the Republican leader retains institutional instincts that would kick in and lead him to follow Senate rules and precedent.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/can-senate-decline-try-impeachment-case

Trump has said he wants the trial if impeached.  Sounds like someone who doesn't have something to hide.

[JustPlaneJane]

If the Bidens have nothing to hide, why aren’t they requesting an investigation into themselves to clear their good name?

LOL.

[Dos Equis]

Trump may not have a choice if he is impeached. He says a lot of things he doesn't do. In this case what's he got to lose by saying it. In fact, he's given you(and others) the impression he has nothing to hide.

If he's got nothing to hide, why is the White House refusing to let some people testify? And why is the White House refusing to turn over requested documents to the House? Are those the actions of an innocent man?

Yes they are.  You don't have to waive privileges to disprove ridiculous allegations.  And you don't have to justify exercising basic rights of privacy, due process, etc.  The "what have you got to hide" argument is just wrong. 

[JustPlaneJane]

Can any of you Democrats explain why this completely fair and totally unbiased farce that Adam Shit is overseeing hasn’t called Alexandra Chalupa as a witness yet?

I’m sure it’s just a temporary oversight...

Losing comes so natural for libidiots.

[The Scott]

Good question. Maybe father and son think there is already enough energy and time being wasted on this folderal. Better to spend their time on Joe Biden's campaign for the win as America's next President in 2020.

And honey, if what's good for the goose, is good for the gander. You should put a bug in your hero's ear. Why not ask him why he's doing everything possilble to obstruct an  investigation that he claims would clear him of any wrong doing(s)? Note: I added the 's' because they are multiple.

Your dislike for President Trump is deep. I trust it is so complete that you have removed any and all monies from any and all investments, i.e., your entire retirement portfolio.   You, being a stalwart stagnationist should stand proud and refuse to profit from his leadership.

Oh...And leave the United States.  And take Streisand with you. 

Our nation needed a real world businessman.  Someone who is proud to be an American.  Someone who values our military and law enforcement personnel.  Someone that helps everyone to be able to help themselves.  Someone that refuses to apologize to the emotionally apoplectic.

I am first and foremost an American.  No fucking hyphen in that citizenship either.  President Trump is fantastic.

So then, you and everyone else here are full of crap unless you release your financial records and divest yourself entirely of all investments.  All of them.  And then give it to the fucking terminally lazy or as many of you like to refer to them...Welfare Recipients.

Abracadabra mother fuckers.  Indeed.

[jude2]

Yep.

House Judiciary Committee announces first impeachment hearing, invites Trump to attend
The president has complained that he's been deprived of due process by the Democrats
Nov. 26, 2019
By Dareh Gregorian

The House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday announced it will hold its first public impeachment hearing next week, and invited President Donald Trump and his lawyers "to participate."

"I am hopeful that you and your counsel will opt to participate in the Committee's hearing, consistent with the rules of decorum and with the solemn nature before us," Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler said in a letter announcing the hearing.

Nadler said the hearing, which will focus on "Constitutional Grounds for Presidential Impeachment," will take place on Dec. 4.

Nadler said the hearing comes as the inquiry enters "a new phase."

"Our first task is to explore the framework put in place to respond to serious allegations of impeachable misconduct like those against President Trump," Nadler said, adding that Trump, who has complained that the House is not giving him due process, "has a choice to make: he can take this opportunity to be represented in the impeachment hearings, or he can stop complaining about the process. I hope that he chooses to participate in the inquiry, directly or through counsel, as other Presidents have done before him."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry/house-judiciary-committee-announces-first-impeachment-hearing-invites-trump-attend-n1091861?cid=sm_npd_ms_fb_ma&fbclid=IwAR2UsK2lwCXxL4brjBT_qet9z0qxDeBpVu0-iAiebyvvHcVLLTngd6Jp8iI&fbclid=IwAR2f46aDOxDDZUMHf48GCQwdUly5lb8wX9n55eiNkmcc4w8H76K63QqoWTA

Now they are going to give failure Nadler a chance.

[JustPlaneJane]

What a glorious time we live in, where we finally have a President of the people and for the people.

I can’t wait for the 8 years of the Trump Jr. presidency and then the 8 years of the Ivanka presidency !!!

Thank God in heaven for making Hillary Clinton such a shitty candidate

[Montague]

Your dislike for President Trump is deep. I trust it is so complete that you have removed any and all monies from any and all investments, i.e., your entire retirement portfolio.   You, being a stalwart stagnationist should stand proud and refuse to profit from his leadership.

Oh...And leave the United States.  And take Streisand with you. 

Our nation needed a real world businessman.  Someone who is proud to be an American.  Someone who values our military and law enforcement personnel.  Someone that helps everyone to be able to help themselves.  Someone that refuses to apologize to the emotionally apoplectic.

I am first and foremost an American.  No fucking hyphen in that citizenship either.  President Trump is fantastic.

So then, you and everyone else here are full of crap unless you release your financial records and divest yourself entirely of all investments.  All of them.  And then give it to the fucking terminally lazy or as many of you like to refer to them...Welfare Recipients.

Abracadabra mother fuckers.  Indeed.

"primemuscle" really is meant to be taken with a grain of salt.
Honestly: if the majority of people were like "him," how do you think our country would have survived this long?

Seriously - like coward/howard - he's NOT to be taken seriously.

[Thin Lizzy]

Now they are going to give failure Nadler a chance.

He is inviting Trump to give it some legitimacy. At this point nobody gives a fuck anymore about the stupid impeachment. The Democrats controlled  the entire process yet support for impeachment has gone down. There’s no way to dance around the fact that it has been a failure.

The Washington Examiner is not a right wing media outlet:


Support for impeachment drops after second week of hearings: Poll


https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/support-for-impeachment-drops-after-second-week-of-hearings-poll

[JustPlaneJane]

Joe Biden is absolutely certain that he never talked to his son Hunter about how they were going to steal millions of dollars from China.

[SOMEPARTS]

Joe Biden is absolutely certain that he never talked to his son Hunter about how they were going to steal millions of dollars from China.

When somebody dares ask a question he doesn't like he starts shaking his cane at them.

[The Scott]

Long story short, your admiration for Trump has everything to do with money. So as long as the economy is doing well, you are his devotee. Makes one wonder if you'd still be his loyal suck up should the economy tank during his reign.

I am an American.  Trump is too.  You, on the LEFT hand...are not.

[JustPlaneJane]

President Donald Trump will have 50% approval by African-Americans by Christmas.

2020 is going to be a Republican landslide.

Blacks do not care about the Green New Steal or Open Borders

[The Scott]

What a zinger!

I'd put my family tree up against yours any time. Then we can see who is the real American.

And therein lies the difference.  My family never lived in trees.  You cannot win at this. I am an American and proud of my Nation and our President.  You and several others here appear to be flaccid fools.  Ashamed of the Founding Fathers and all that came after them.  You wish to re-write history.  You would call a man a woman and a woman a man.  You would claim there are multiple "genders". 

You would toss out science except when it serves to belittle Christians.  Your family tree?  It has root rot and is long dead. 

Your past, your family history ?  It is only worthy of mention if you honor it. Being a pussy is not an honorable thing. 

Talk about Idiocracy...It is more than evident and not just in the young and feckless but also the aged and morally and mentally impotent.  As stated elsewhere,  Men such as I concern ourselves not so much with "left" and "right" politics but with what is right and what is wrong.

I chose right.  You can say a red light means go but sooner or later you will get your dumb libtard, everyone wins a trophy ass run over.

[The Scott]

Does your response mean your family immigrated to the U.S. at the end of the Korean war?

I am looking within my words for any indication that my family came here at the end of the Korean war and cannot find any.  Why you would ax that is beyond me, save for the assumption that this particular time period is without merit to you because your family arrived on the Gayflower or some other reason that lacks merit or humor.

It's called writing and a sense of humor.  I have it about myself. I am not very intelligent and I have a slight physical handicap. 

Some of my family fought in the Korean War.  Some in WWII.  We came here to be Americans, not "-Americans". 

Now run along before I say more things that go over your head because you're on your knees.