HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » The Mueller Report Unplug...

Sun Apr 21, 2019, 06:43 PM

The Mueller Report Unplugged

“There's no right way to do wrong, and no wrong way to do right.”
Smokin' Joe Frazier


I find myself thinking about the simple wisdom of the former heavyweight's saying, that his son Marvis shared with me years ago. In my mind, it applies to two of the issues that are currently on my mind – the terrible behaviors documented in the Mueller Report, and the response of the Democrats in Washington, DC. I'll start by saying that in reading redacted versions of two of the three-part Mueller Report, I am fully aware that I am viewing two of the most important documents in our nation's history. And that it would be a shame if such documents served only to delineate the end of our constitutional democracy.

(Note: the “part three” of the Mueller Report is on the counter-intelligence investigation. It goes to top people in the intelligence community. It will not be made public, and at most, only eight members of the House and Senate will learn a limited amount of what it contains. I will speculate that it includes more damning information on the Russian influence on our 2016 election, and on the Trump mob.)

Now, let's briefly consider what information was revealed in parts one and two of the Mueller Report. Perhaps the most ironic thing is that documents that there was a great deal of “collusion” between Russia and the Trump campaign and transition. Collusion, of course, is not a crime. It was, however, unethical and unpatriotic.

The investigation did not find evidence of conspiracy that reached the level needed for indictments. It did catch a number of Trump people lying about their contacts with Russians and people connected to Russia. The report notes that some were able to destroy records that likely would have been important to the investigation. Most importantly, in my opinion, it showed that direct coordination was avoided by the tried and true tactic of creating a triangle: Russian military intelligence stole e-mails, provided them to Wikileaks, which then made them public, for the Trump campaign's use.

As most have figured out, the best example of using a cut-out (or third party) to conceal the conspiracy relates to Don Jr.'s infamous meeting at the Trump Tower. This was attended by Jared, Manafort, and a collection of Russians, who offered “dirt” on Hillary Clinton. The investigators concluded that Junior and Jared were eager to get the dirt, but too stupid to know they were violating campaign finance law. But Manafort had run campaigns before, and he understood the deal. He sent coded messages on his cell phone, which remain unexplained.

Because Manafort would not cooperate, this obvious link in the chain could not be proven. Hence, he was prosecuted Al Capone style. Junior would later have communications with Wikileaks, and Trump would order a top aide to find out what information would be “dumped” at future dates. And, of course, Roger Stone would have contact with Wikileaks, at very least using another cut-out. More, Trump would help draft the lie about “Russian adoptions” when the media began reporting on this.

Report Two documents a long-term campaign by Trump to obstruct both Mr. Comey's and Mr. Mueller's investigation(s). This report makes clear that, were it not for DOJ policy, Trump would be indicted. The evidence clearly reaches the threshold of a 95% chance of conviction. And, very importantly, Mr. Mueller repeatedly makes clear that he intends this documentation to be used by Congress in a manner delineated in the Constitution – and to be available for use by federal prosecutors in the future, when Trump is no longer in office. Also, Mr. Mueller sent 14 cases to other prosecutors.

Thus, we can conclude that try as they might, there was no right way for the Trump people to do all of the wrong they did. The question at hand is what is the best way for the rest of us – those in office in DC, the media, and citizens – to seek justice? There are a number of options.

First, there are those who are opposed to the thought of impeachment hearings. Within this group, there are sub-groups. Some believe that republicans in the Senate will never convict Trump if the House impeaches him. Others think the public will confuse the issues in the Mueller Report with the Clinton experience, and turn against Democrats in 2020. And still others think the process would prove time consuming for the many Democrats in the House and Senate running for the Democratic nomination. I think the first and third concerns are legitimate and deserve our attention,

There are other Democrats who believe that, rather than (or at least before) beginning impeachment hearings, Democrats should focus on getting a vote to censure Trump. While I do not think that alone is satisfactory, I recognize that it, too, is a legitimate issue for further discussion.

A significant number of people want Congress to begin impeachment hearings very soon. Strike while the iron is hot. Again, that is a legitimate position. I'm not opposed to it per se, but there is a related position that I believe is better. It's true that a committee holding potential impeachment hearings has the superior claim to access to any and all official records. Yet, the current House committees that are seeking those records do have a solid legal case to justify their demands.

This includes things beyond what the two Mueller Reports contain. Perhaps the most significant is Trump's financial records, including his tax records. The emoluments clause needs to be included in any effort to impeach Trump. There need to be several solid articles of impeachment, covering a wide range of Trump's behaviors, for the republicans in the Senate. And there is a significant amount of further information that will come out in the next few months. That includes information from documents, as well as members of the White House, prosecutors, and the intelligence communit testifying to Congress. And there will be leaks.

Also important is that Democrats have to alter the perception that impeachment is merely a political activity. That it is two teams – Democrats and republicans – fighting for political advantage. No, this is about what the United States stands for, and what it means. There will be 20-25% of Trump's base that is too stupid, too ignorant, and/or too hateful to withdraw their support for Trump. But there are others in our country who will benefit from being informed by congressional hearings, and then support impeachment. For they will recognize that Trump's presidency is a skid mark on our nation's history.

Peace,
H2O Man

60 replies, 6116 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 60 replies Author Time Post
Reply The Mueller Report Unplugged (Original post)
H2O Man Apr 2019 OP
MyOwnPeace Apr 2019 #1
H2O Man Apr 2019 #3
rgbecker Apr 2019 #2
H2O Man Apr 2019 #4
Liberal Jesus Freak Apr 2019 #5
H2O Man Apr 2019 #6
coeur_de_lion Apr 2019 #7
H2O Man Apr 2019 #16
blogslut Apr 2019 #8
H2O Man Apr 2019 #21
Me. Apr 2019 #53
H2O Man Apr 2019 #54
malaise Apr 2019 #9
H2O Man Apr 2019 #22
Kurt V. Apr 2019 #10
H2O Man Apr 2019 #23
BigmanPigman Apr 2019 #11
H2O Man Apr 2019 #24
BigmanPigman Apr 2019 #50
H2O Man Apr 2019 #52
Me. Apr 2019 #12
H2O Man Apr 2019 #26
Me. Apr 2019 #29
H2O Man Apr 2019 #31
Me. Apr 2019 #32
politicaljunkie41910 Apr 2019 #56
coeur_de_lion Apr 2019 #13
H2O Man Apr 2019 #27
coeur_de_lion Apr 2019 #40
H2O Man Apr 2019 #48
Beartracks Apr 2019 #14
FakeNoose Apr 2019 #19
H2O Man Apr 2019 #28
FakeNoose Apr 2019 #33
Beartracks Apr 2019 #58
Fiendish Thingy Apr 2019 #15
H2O Man Apr 2019 #30
bluescribbler Apr 2019 #34
spanone Apr 2019 #17
H2O Man Apr 2019 #36
uponit7771 Apr 2019 #18
H2O Man Apr 2019 #37
kentuck Apr 2019 #20
H2O Man Apr 2019 #38
Nitram Apr 2019 #25
H2O Man Apr 2019 #42
Nitram Apr 2019 #49
H2O Man Apr 2019 #51
cp Apr 2019 #35
H2O Man Apr 2019 #43
SharonAnn Apr 2019 #39
H2O Man Apr 2019 #44
peggysue2 Apr 2019 #41
H2O Man Apr 2019 #45
Honeycombe8 Apr 2019 #55
Hekate Apr 2019 #46
MFGsunny Apr 2019 #47
bluestarone Apr 2019 #57
PatrickforO Apr 2019 #59
coeur_de_lion Apr 2019 #60

Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Sun Apr 21, 2019, 06:57 PM

1. Great stuff............

I'm with you about the "alter the perception" part - I believe the critical part is to get Repugs to finally "grow some" and not be afraid of IQ45. At some point we should be able to expect them to do what is right for the United States and not continue to cower under threat of losing their job.
Hell, it IS their job to do the right thing!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MyOwnPeace (Reply #1)

Sun Apr 21, 2019, 07:12 PM

3. Thank you!

Malcolm X used to say that if you want people to act differently, you first must help them to think differently.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Sun Apr 21, 2019, 07:08 PM

2. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rgbecker (Reply #2)

Sun Apr 21, 2019, 07:13 PM

4. Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Sun Apr 21, 2019, 07:13 PM

5. Superb analysis as always n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal Jesus Freak (Reply #5)

Sun Apr 21, 2019, 07:29 PM

6. Thanks.

I think the majority of Democrats, including those elected to represent, recognize that Trump is both corrupt and dangerous. That he admires tyrants, and imagines himself one. That the only dictator that he will never, under any circumstance, say anthing negative about is Putin .....because Putin is indeed a mobster, and Trump sees himself as one, too.

It is evident that a substantial majority within the intelligence community consider Trump a petty monster, who poses a threat to our nationalsecurity. Now, I'm old enough to remember when people like myself didn't trust this community, and for good reason. But times have changed, and for the better. I think it is more the result of younger generations replacing the Hooverites, than anything else. Yet the congressional hearings and oversight post-Nixon helped.

Today, we see people in the intelligence community, along with a team of federal prosecutors, advocating for the most serious of congressional hearings. Their counter-intelligence efforts have proven to them that Trump isn't just an odd fellow who is misunderstood. They know that people do understand him. And that he poses a serious national security threat. I think the Democrats in Congress will find the IC a valuable resource in months to come. I think the media will, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Sun Apr 21, 2019, 07:52 PM

7. Impeachment hearings

Might open some eyes. But they need to be timed well.

Now is not quite the time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coeur_de_lion (Reply #7)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 07:55 AM

16. Regular hearings

find facts; impeachment hearings judge facts. I think a good case can be made for each at this time. But I'd favor fining more at this time, for at least another five to six weeks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Sun Apr 21, 2019, 08:01 PM

8. I think there will be more hearings.

I'm okay with that. If impeachment happens it happens. I think I would rather keep shining bright lights on this blind cockroach of a man. Let him dance in the open for a bit longer.

Remember I said way back: he won't take a step too far, he will take a step too many. I still think that.

I don't know much but I know his business is show business. If the plot never changes then the players must. He's not a sustainable character.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blogslut (Reply #8)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 10:55 AM

21. Right.

Trump is remarkably undisciplined. He'll take that "step too many."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Reply #21)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 05:19 PM

53. That's What I Think Too And Am Waiting

Have also had the thought that he'll have a send in the men with the straight jacket meltdown in front of the cameras.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Me. (Reply #53)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 05:22 PM

54. When Don McGahn testifies,

Trump will lose control.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Sun Apr 21, 2019, 08:05 PM

9. Excellent analysis

Thanks bro

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #9)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 10:57 AM

22. Thank you!

It's "part one," soon to be followed up with "part two." And maybe I'll even post my "part three" here! (grin)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Sun Apr 21, 2019, 08:11 PM

10. you write for me. k&r

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kurt V. (Reply #10)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 10:57 AM

23. Thanks!

I appreciate that!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Sun Apr 21, 2019, 08:15 PM

11. I heard a legal eagle say that we could get his tax returns

fairly easily and quickly as part of impeachment hearings. That would be a definite advantage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BigmanPigman (Reply #11)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 11:07 AM

24. True.

That is correct. If the House has a committee begin hearings to consider impeachment, they could access his taxes easily and quickly. And that is a significant advantag. No doubt about it.

Democrats in other committees have already begun the process of attempting to access his tax returns, as part of oversight. Legally, they are absolutely entitled to them. However, it is clear the administration is set on obstructing them. Thus, it will go to court.

I can see advantages to both approaches. I have no problem with either one, as they both work. However, if the administration tries to stall on the second approach, the House needs to go to the first (impeachment hearings) by the first of June. Just my opinion, of course. I respect those who view it different than me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Reply #24)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 04:58 PM

50. I like your idea of a June 1st deadline.

They will be able to interview Mueller and McGahn by then and they'll have a lot more info from all the investigations by then to decide on an official impeachment probe, televised hearings and then take a vote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BigmanPigman (Reply #50)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 05:09 PM

52. I'd add Rosenstein.

And there are solid experts on the law that should be called, to discuss the problems with seeking to benefit from the Russian crimes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Sun Apr 21, 2019, 08:27 PM

12. INteresting

I will be honest after hearing reports of what the report did/did not say/do and the endless army of Mueller supporters who kept explaining he had a narrow remand and what a brilliant, stand-up guy he is, the pristine mission of the FBI blah, blah, blah, I found myself getting angry. For after an entire day + of listening it seems to me that there is a lot of love for an image that doesn't always deliver or ring true. And I also felt that Mueller and so many of them are more interested/invested in the institution rather than our actual nation. After what was done to HRC, with no real apology that I can remember, to put out a report that wasn't definitive was, I feel an obstruction of justice in and of itself. And it confirmed that these people always get off for one reason or another, whereas a black boy who stole a hundred dollars in quarters from a laundromat is right now sitting in a jail cell.

Cy Vance let the Trumps kids off for a campaign contribution, Acosta let Epstein off easy for what we do not know. All of it, has a familiar whiff. Why didn't Mueller subpoena Don J.? And yes I know it keeps being said that there are 12-14 cases that have been farmed out but I am beginning to feel hoodwinked again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Me. (Reply #12)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 11:25 AM

26. Valid points.

It is frustrating. We are dealing with the obvious downside of bureaucracy -- which is a system relying upon the most common method of dealing with issues. Those who have gone to the DMV, for instance, with an issue that is fairly unique understand how time-consuming and frustrating that can be.

Trump is, by all measures, a unique problem. We haven't seen anything like him in modern history. He makes Nixon seem cuddily, almost noble. Thus, I suggest we go back in history, before modern times.

According to Laurence Tribe's book, "To End a Presidency: The Power of Impeachment," the primary concern of the Founding Fathers was that a president would have financial involvements with a foreign entity/ country that would influence American policy towards the president's personal gain. In other words, they anticipated a Donald Trump. And they thus included impeachment in the Constitution.

I believe the Mueller investigation should have included this issue in both Part 1 and 2 of the report. I am 100% confident that it is addressed in Part 3, though I will not speculate upon to what extent. Certainly, it applies to incidents such as Trump's revealing Israel's intelligence operations when the president hosted the Russians in the Oval Office. I could easily list another dozen similar concerns, but I suspect we all could.

Had the Mueller Team been openly investigating Trump's financial ties, they knew he would follow through in a desperate effort to fire Bob and many others. Bureaucracy tends to avoid emergency conflicts when possible. Hence, the decision to move this issue to Congress.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Reply #26)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 11:48 AM

29. Another Thing

The repeated blather about department policy being that you can't indict a sitting president. First of all, it is only a policy and I don't see how a policy supersedes a law, which states criminals can and should be indicted. In fact, I feel it sets a dangerous precedent in that it sets a citizen above the law. And what about Kushner revealing Intelligence to MSB, a reveal which reportedly costs lives?

I thank you for this thread though I don't know that you set it up with the intent for it to be my rant forum.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Me. (Reply #29)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 12:00 PM

31. I think that

we have good reason to rant. I've been reading other rants, and thought I'd add my own, to try to provide a bit of structure regarding what has been happening. It's a summary of the ranting conversations that I've been having with family, friends, and associates. (I've avoiding including my rants that I engage in when I'm home alone with my dogs, both of whom listen patiently. One follows me faithfully when I pace back and forth, and the other licks my face when I sit down.)

That's an important point -- not indicting a president is a policy, based on two of three opinions, but is not rooted in the Constitution. As residents of New York State, we may soon be singing "I Love New York," should our state officials indict Trump. It remains a very real possibility.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Reply #31)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 12:10 PM

32. ...

fingers crossed

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Me. (Reply #32)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 06:51 PM

56. Hey, that's what VP's are for.If the President proves to be corrupt, impeach him and the VP steps up

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Sun Apr 21, 2019, 08:39 PM

13. Another thing that keeps repeating

In my mind over and over, is the redacted Mueller report is very damning.

Christ almighty how bad must the unredacted report be?

Barr would’ve redacted the worst of the report.

I am a little surprised he didn’t redact more.

Is that where your leaks come in?

It’s scary to me to think of what in the report is still hidden from us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coeur_de_lion (Reply #13)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 11:37 AM

27. True.

I think it is fair to say that leaks will include some of what was redacted. Also, from the information gathered during the investigation, but not included in the report, that is closely related. I'd look to the top journalists who served in various intelligence agencies before joining (embedded) in the media. There are four or five in particular, in my mind.

I'd also focus some attention to the growing divides between some in the DOJ that you and I have discussed elsewhere. We already saw that some of the Mueller Team let it be known that Barr wa/is full of shit. The conflict between Barr nd Mr. Mueller can come to light when Mr. Mueller testifies to the House committee.

Equally important, though in a somewhat distinct way, would be having Rosenstein testify publicly. To be clear, I do not mean the wax figure from Madame Tussauds' museum that was propped up behind Barr during the press conference. Odd, that, how Barr attempted to ape the Sgt. Pepper's cover.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Reply #27)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 02:18 PM

40. You can send me those journalists'

names right?

I will keep an eye out.

I do think if the redacted report is so damaging the unredacted must be earth shattering.

Do you think Rosenstein has gone to the dark side?

Or are they all just trying to stop trump from going completely apeshit?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coeur_de_lion (Reply #40)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 04:02 PM

48. Sure.

I think that a few people I'd listen closely include Corn, Isikoff, Woodward, and definitely Malcolm Nance.

I remember what Jim Comey said about Rod Rosenstein: he isn't a strong character when it comes to standing up for other people. But I think that were he to testify before Congress, he'd be honest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Sun Apr 21, 2019, 09:23 PM

14. So what happened to part three on the counter-intelligence investigation?

Is it just sitting in a locked drawer in Barr's desk, gathering dust?

======

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beartracks (Reply #14)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 08:11 AM

19. It's in the 2nd paragraph of the OP's excellent analysis

(Note: the “part three” of the Mueller Report is on the counter-intelligence investigation. It goes to top people in the intelligence community. It will not be made public, and at most, only eight members of the House and Senate will learn a limited amount of what it contains. I will speculate that it includes more damning information on the Russian influence on our 2016 election, and on the Trump mob.)


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FakeNoose (Reply #19)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 11:46 AM

28. Thank you!

I am confident that we will get a hint of a part of it, as it likely relates to one of the 12 "mystery" cases that Mr. Mueller handed over to other offices. This one involvs the NRA's role in funneling Russian money into the campaign indirectly. Again, as I noted in the OP, mobstersalways use a cut-out when possible, and the NRA was willing to serve.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Reply #28)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 12:16 PM

33. If we ever see the full Mueller Report leaked...

... I have a feeling part 3 won't be included. I'm quite certain somebody will leak Parts 1 & 2. They have it and they're biding their time. We'll see the full un-redacted version by this summer, I'm hoping.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FakeNoose (Reply #19)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 07:18 PM

58. D'oh! Sorry, I didn't re-read the OP before asking my question.

I got to the end and thought, "But wait, what happened to part 3??"

=======

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Sun Apr 21, 2019, 09:30 PM

15. Clearly, the Trump gang didn't heed the advice of the Devil Makes Three...



IMO, Congress should avoid/ignore the potential court delays, and go straight to a methodically paced Impeachment inquiry. If Barr, Mnuchin or Rettig try to get in Congress's way, impeach them first.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fiendish Thingy (Reply #15)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 11:49 AM

30. Thank you!

I hope that you express your opinion to the officials who were elected to represent you. They really need to hear from the public. It is essential that people speak up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Reply #30)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 12:24 PM

34. Done

I jurat called Rep. Katherine Clark. I told the staffer that I am reading the Mueller report, and that it is clear to me that the pResident needs to be impeached, and that she support any impeachment hearings.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 07:58 AM

17. K&R...

Thanks H2O Man

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spanone (Reply #17)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 01:51 PM

36. Thank you!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 08:00 AM

18. This is editorial worthy posting ... K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #18)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 01:52 PM

37. Thanks!

Much appreciated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 08:20 AM

20. K&R

They actually believed that the Constitution prevented anyone from indicting a sitting President except the Congress. It would not hold legal water. And perhaps they were right? Perhaps it is the sole responsibility of the Congress to address issues of high crimes or misdemeanors by the President?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #20)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 02:06 PM

38. There is a lot

of confusion and misinformation on that subject, isn't there? Nothing in the Constitution says that a president can't be indicted. That is simply the policy of the DOJ, based upon two of the three opinions expressed over the past 45 years. And policies are distinct from constitutional law.

Likewise, we keep hearing that impeachment is a political action. That is somewhat true, since it is elected politicians that impeach in the House, and then try an impeachment, and serve as jury, in the Senate. And, when done for strictly political reasons -- such as in the case of Clinton -- one can say it was strictly political.

There are vast distinctions between the issues involving Trump and Clinton. The Trump case is far closer to our nation's Nixon experience. This includes having numerous individuals surrounding each indicted and convicted for crimes. Serious crimes. There were no issues involving blow jobs in either. Just crimes.

More importantly, one must understand the implication of having the Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court presiding over the Senate trial. Quite simply, this means that impeachment is actually a legal trial, for Chief Justices are not tasked by the Constitution with heading up political events. It is not a criminal trial, but rather, a civil trial. Different rules of evidence and legal standards than criminal trials, and actually much closer to a small claims court. I must admit, however, that there are republican officials that I believe should be sued in small claims courts by citizens for fraud, and that is based largely on my political beliefs!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 11:23 AM

25. I agree. The survival of our democracy depends upon concrete steps being taken to directly deal with

the monster in the White House. The Democratic Party has ducked two opportunities to stand up to Republican undermining of our democracy. It is time to take a stand. Finish investigations that Mueller left unfinished, and vote to impeach based on the very clear road map to obstruction charges that Mueller has given us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nitram (Reply #25)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 02:19 PM

42. Thanks!

The older I get, the more I am aware of the dangers of moving away from -- or ignoring -- the Constitution. And I'm not a rigid "original intent" type, as I believe the document intends for the rule of law and social justice, rather than simply having rich old white males decide everything. Thus, the Bill of Rights and other amendments are essential in our attempts to create a more perfect union.

That Constitution has clear instructions on how to deal with a shitbag like Trump. There is, of course, a great deal of other work to be undertaken. But I don't see much opportunity for progress until he is removed from the White House.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Reply #42)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 04:10 PM

49. It's not just progress not being made. It is the current insanity becoming the new normal.

We need to get back on track. Fuck the Senate, follow the rules laid down by the Constitution and let the chips fall where they may. If the House does its homework, public opinion will force the Senate acknowledge the travesties the current administration is inflicting upon the nation and the world.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nitram (Reply #49)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 05:07 PM

51. Well said!

I agree completely!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 01:44 PM

35. Very good thinking

Thank you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cp (Reply #35)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 02:22 PM

43. Thank you!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 02:11 PM

39. My opinion keeps shifting so I've decided that I'll let Pelosi and the Chairs decide.

They're smart, capable, and they know what's ahead of them better than I do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SharonAnn (Reply #39)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 02:26 PM

44. I, too, have confidence

in Speaker Pelosi and the Chairs of the committees. And I also go back and forth between being patient, and wanting impeachment now. There is no question that impeachment and conviction are warrented based soley upon the Mueller Report, but there is the republican factor in the Senate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 02:18 PM

41. Another excellent, OP!

Thanks, H2O Man. I too want public hearings to proceed before we jump into an impeachment process. Let Congress assemble the documentation, publicly interview the players while shaping the narrative and timeline. The more exposed Donald Trump is the better. His approval numbers are already slipping since the report was released; they need to slip more, and the public needs time to get on board, be ready to pull the trigger on the impeachment process. The public at large is simply not there yet. But that can quickly change as revelations, specific malfeasances are documented, publicized, exposed. We need all our ducks in a row before we jump because once we start impeachment proceedings, all the oxygen will be sucked from the air. We'll only get one shot. As history warns us:

If you aim at the King, you dare not miss.

The future of the country is riding/wobbling on the next 18+ months. We've gotta get this right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to peggysue2 (Reply #41)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 02:32 PM

45. Thank you!

I'm old enough to remember that in the Senate Watergate Committee report, it was noted that the primary responsibility of the Congress is to inform the public. The report includes a couple of historical quotes to document this, and I always try to keep them in mind.

Also, being of both limited life experience and intellect, I always compare everything to the sport of boxing. I never approached any important fight -- if I were boxing, or the trainer -- with only one of the opponent's weaknesses in mind. As you note, that would be dangerous, be it with a king of any type. I focus on all strengths and weaknesses in preparation, and identify ways to exploit each. And I view this critical struggle in our nation's current history in exactly that context.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to peggysue2 (Reply #41)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 06:47 PM

55. +1. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 02:52 PM

46. KnR

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 03:03 PM

47. K & R ... + 1,000,000 --- KUDOS on yet another of your usually impressive analyses!

Quoting from your post ::

Also important is that Democrats have to alter the perception that impeachment is merely a political activity. That it is two teams – Democrats and republicans – fighting for political advantage. No, this is about what the United States stands for, and what it means.

It's on us, all of us, NOT to surrender the framing to the R's - evah!

Their M.O. is always about DIVIDING an issue in absolute oppositional terms, as if all analysis must de facto ONLY net "either-or" results. Just like the false debates of the environment OR business. Turns out, of course, it's about "AND" ---- we can protect good environment AND good business.

I believe most either-or frames lead to false equivalencies (whataoutisms, both/sides-isms etc.)

We are not fooled.

We must begin with the end in mind - both as a function of the many elements of integrity and as a function of the calendar!

For example, when impeachment remains on the table as a chosen vehicle, by when (in the 2020 election calendar) should it be finished? Rule of thumb? 3 months before Nov 2020? 6 months before Nov 2020? Wise folks will know. Please tell us.

Then, we work our way backwards on that calendar. Such a timeline will also easily determine, anticipating slow-walking denials of dox, responses to subpoenas etc., when time and information gathered via congressional testimony, unredacted disclosures as appropriate to Congress critters, etc...... will absolutely warrant the catapult from oversight investigations and hearings to IMPEACHMENT hearings.

I remain hopeful that in these vital matters Congressional Dems will demonstrate faithfulness to our constitution and our democracy.

Do some of you legal beagles and congressional procedures experts help me with these questions as they would likely apply to the overarching timetable factors? Thanks in advance!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 06:56 PM

57. Good words spoken here as always!!

Enjoy your posts!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Mon Apr 22, 2019, 09:05 PM

59. Another good post.

Thank you. I've bookmarked it for future reference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Tue Apr 23, 2019, 05:55 PM

60. I read through your whole thread

And came to the conclusion as many others have, that we need to hold hearings and expose the lies and obstruction publicly before beginning impeachment.

Nixon's approval before they started Watergate hearings was 48%. Trump's is 37%. By the time they finish having McGahn and Mueller testify it should be in the 20s.

Trump’s crimes testified to by credible witnesses on national television will tank his approval numbers.

Then we start impeachment proceedings.

I say he's ripe for the picking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread