General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsA sure sign the release of the Mueller report wasn't the right time to start impeachment but now is:
The Mueller Report, while damaging, was a mere and easy to contain puddle compared to the cascading waterfall of revelations that's about to engulf Trump. It just didn't - and, given its limited scope, couldn't - have the volume, breadth, weight, and simplicity that the Ukraine scandal has.
Now the floodgate has been opened, a torrent has been unloosed, and it can't be managed and manipulated by a shameless president, a crooked Attorney General and a crowd of hapless, spineless Republican legislators.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
tblue37
(65,212 posts)Response to StarfishSaver (Original post)
Post removed
DemocracyMouse
(2,275 posts)OMG, one more time:
Mueller outlined over 10 instances of obstruction of justice and was 100% clear in stating he could not exonerate Trump and passed on the task to the House for an impeachment process.
Barr claimed, i.e. lied, that there was nothing to see, indeed Trump's obstruction of evidence, and refusal to testify, etc., hid the truth. Again it was uo to the Congress to open the lid. That's what they are finally doing — with even more evidence to take Trump's crime syndicate down.
Where are you getting your talking points?
kairos12
(12,841 posts)The Mueller report read like a mob story. Impeachment was entirely justified.
DURHAM D
(32,603 posts)
Cary
(11,746 posts)Our job is to be good followers, if we want our leaders to succeed.
I want Nancy Pelosi to succeed. What she and her fellow Democrats are doing now is right, right now.
The past is prologue.
BootinUp
(47,053 posts)
Triloon
(506 posts)considered to be impeachable offenses then all of these more recent developments would have still arisen. And there is more on the way, even russia russia russia is coming back into the picture.
Sogo
(4,986 posts)Trump really isn't taking the impeachment inquiry seriously; that he thinks Nancy Pelosi is bluffing.
Oy....
OliverQ
(3,363 posts)I mean, I know there was obstruction, but he never found the secret codeword server that had all of Trump's Russian conversations on it or the evidence that he told the Russians he didn't care about them attacking us?
Seems like Mueller wasn't really invested in finding conspiracy with Russia.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)Among other things, we haven't seen the redacted report.
Arthur_Frain
(1,836 posts)Which I think is what a bunch of us are expecting with this. Does anyone expect Moscow Mitch and his shit show revue to do anything? He won’t. None of this is making it past the Senate.
I think Pelosi was (rightly, in my opinion) angling towards simply having enough momentum behind her to “unelect” him in 2020. Although the election too, will be held up as “fake”, by the republicans, it’s still the most legitimate method we have of getting him out of office, and by this point in time, once all the legal legerdemain is through and done with, the time frame is going to be pretty similar. In fact, in this age of endless appeals, I’d rather put all of my efforts into the election, I think it’s a better endgame.
FoxNewsSucks
(10,414 posts)Neither has the House. They need to immediately demand the full report and the underlying documents. It might be there, and because Asshole General Barr covered it up, this is how it is being made public despite the obstruction.
Or some of these things might be considered "not the scope" of Mueller's investigation.
BlueWI
(1,736 posts)How much compromise of sensitive info has occurred to this point? We are still seeing the tip of the iceberg.
Every day Trump is in office means more future damage to repair and chaos in the present. We all need to amp up the pressure in every way possible to get to a resolution, as fast as possible. We can hand out the awards for timing later.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)But impeachment based on information a majority of the public didn't understand and didn't overwhelmingly believe warranted impeachment would not only have allowed the bad behavior to continue, it would have given Trump free rein to continue with impunity..
Better to wait a couple of months and get it right than to do it fast and let it die
but say "at least we tried and that's all that matters."
BlueWI
(1,736 posts)Far too many claims of certainty are presented on this when we are far from certain about what has happened or will happen.
Volaris
(10,266 posts)Or even that that there were so many witches to choose from.
It's that there were SO GODDAMN MANY WITCHES that it was going to be impossible to write a report to congress about ONLY 2 of them!
I think with this many witches about to turn rat and testify, it will be IMPOSSIBLE to show trump any mercy whatsoever, even if we wanted to as a means to a desired end.
After this weekend, it will be a fucking miracle if his metaphorical head isn't put on a spike on the White House front lawn as a warning to others.
bubbazero
(296 posts)This question/suggestion is not snark, but rather an idea to help avoid a possible delaying tactic by Trump and his cronies. 1. Congress will need to see the "double secret files" which Trump has been using to store, (hide) records of his activities. Obviously subpoenas are forthcoming. 2, Trump claims "executive privilege" as this is not a "real" formal impeachment inquiry. The argument Trump will make is a Formal Impeachment Inquiry cannot be simply declared by the Speaker of The House--Whom ever that is, but rather must be voted on and passed by a simple majority of the House. 3. A vote to declare a Formal Impeachment Inquiry could get politically dicey for both parties--Repubs don't want to go on record either way, and Dems in swing districts still nervous about blowback. 4. Therefore arrange a vote on a resolution to open a Formal Impeachment Inquiry, with the caveat that said vote shall be conducted on a voice vote--(aye or ney) 5. Have said voice vote then certified as members agreeing to the finding of the legislative body leadership. This certification that individual members agree with the results of voice vote and see no reason to call roll for resolution vote and be done thru it's own roll call. 6. This gives house lawyers a solid defense against delaying tactic as mentioned above. 7. With courts recognizing this is now a full Formal Impeachment Inquiry, with all legal powers bestowed upon the house under the Law, Trumps delaying tactics prove much less effective.................Sorry for the length, no need to reply, just a seed of a possible idea, plz run with it if you find this or something else along these lines prudent. thanks
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)Yes. And they'll no doubt get them.
2, Trump claims "executive privilege" as this is not a "real" formal impeachment inquiry. The argument Trump will make is a Formal Impeachment Inquiry cannot be simply declared by the Speaker of The House--Whom ever that is, but rather must be voted on and passed by a simple majority of the House.
They'll make all kinds of arguments, but like most of them, this one won't fly.
First, the House, not the president, determines the timing and nature of its proceedings and it can do so without a vote of the full House. Impeachment inquiries can be conducted by committees without a vote of the House and have been done so in the past.This argument doesn't fly.
Second, it's not the nature of a proceeding that determines whether executive privilege applies but the nature of the communication. The only thing impeachment does is give Congress a little more weight in the balancing test the court applies when deciding whether it should "pierce the veil" of executive privilege veil. But if a communication doesn't fall within the definition of executive privilege in the first place, it's not protected by executive privilege at all, so no such balancing test is necessary and Congress is entitled to it, regardless the nature of the proceeding.
3. A vote to declare a Formal Impeachment Inquiry could get politically dicey for both parties--Repubs don't want to go on record either way, and Dems in swing districts still nervous about blowback. 4. Therefore arrange a vote on a resolution to open a Formal Impeachment Inquiry, with the caveat that said vote shall be conducted on a voice vote--(aye or ney)
As I said, a vote by the House isn't necessary and never has been. But also a voice vote isn't conclusive because any Member, after a voice vote, can call for a roll call vote, which a Republican member would no doubt do. So they'd still have to have a full roll call vote anyway.
5. Have said voice vote then certified as members agreeing to the finding of the legislative body leadership. This certification that individual members agree with the results of voice vote and see no reason to call roll for resolution vote and be done thru it's own roll call.
6. This gives house lawyers a solid defense against delaying tactic as mentioned above.
7. With courts recognizing this is now a full Formal Impeachment Inquiry, with all legal powers bestowed upon the house under the Law, Trumps delaying tactics prove much less effective.
I don't think this would be a good idea, because jumping through this hoop to forestall a completely baseless argument by the Trump team would set a dangerous precedent of allowing the executive branch to dictate to the legislative branch how it conducts its business and also lead courts to require in the future that the House vote not just on every impeachment inquiry but also all manner of other investigatory and oversight activities the House currently conducts under its rules but not to a full House vote. The House should allow Trump's baseless defenses to force it to give up its prerogatives and powers.
Thanks for sharing these thoughts - it's an interesting discussion!
NCLefty
(3,678 posts)
spanone
(135,778 posts)leading to his impeachment.
