Donald's legal team wants to overturn Watergate decision...

[Nithavela]

Justice Department asks judge to block House from getting Mueller grand jury materials, says Watergate decision was wrong



Just sayin', but if your impeachment defense strategy requires you to rewrite Watergate, you've got a problem.

Thoughts?

They stacked the supreme court. They'll overturn watergate.

 

[Allandavid]

No one else is dangerous enough to really do something to solve the issues and problems that confronts us.

I don’t think you need “dangerous”....I think you need smart, honest, compassionate, just, reliable...if you were able to roll together the 8 or 10 presidents that came before Trump, you might have a satisfactory leader...

 

[Allandavid]

In other news, Trump has declared that the South actually won the Civil War and so Ulysses S. needs to return that sword....

 

[Kentonio]

They stacked the supreme court. They'll overturn watergate.

I don't think so. If Ginsburg had passed and been replaced by a hardliner then just maybe, but the court isn't stacked yet. There's also that tendency for even quite hardline justices to become more moderate over time (with a few exeptions obviously).

There's also the final point that to overturn Watergate would mean to basically tear up the constitutions separation of powers and congressional oversight duties, and even a hard right justice is wildly unlikely to do that. They can't be threatened by Trump, they have nothing to lose basically, and it seems once people rise to a SCOTUS position they tend to take their position and legacy fairly seriously.

 

[joshua 1 9]

.if you were able to roll together the 8 or 10 presidents that came before Trump, you might have a satisfactory leader...

I doubt it. In the Bible the people wanted a King, even though that was never God's plan. Still He allowed them to have what they want so they could see what a disaster it was going to be.

 

[joshua 1 9]

We'll see what happens.

We know what is going to happen. Trump is going to get re elected. The same as he was elected the first time. Even though there are people unhappy about Trump so they are going to try to do whatever they can to stop him. Even though there is nothing they can do. The economy is better under Trump and that is all anyone cares about. As Hubert Hoover promised: A chicken in every pot and a car in every garage.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Again, where does it state that the House must have a vote before starting an Impeachment investigation?

In the constitution, you should read it sometime. It is really pretty interesting. The house has the power and they have to vote. The speaker of the house does not have the power on her own to do anything. If they want a investigation then they have to vote to have a investigation. In a court of law you have to have a grand jury before you can bring charges against a person. There is nothing the liberals are going to be able to do to stop Trump. I am sure they are going to try, but it will all come to nothing. It surprises me that they have taken obstruction to the level they have. What they do not seem to realize is they are setting their own standard and they are going to have to live by the standard that they are setting. We have to be very careful how we treat people because that sets the standard for how others are going to treat us.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Where is your reference on what the "correct" procedure is here?

If they want to investigate Trump, then they need to vote on that. The speaker does not have the power or the authority to do that on her own. That is why this is an illegal procedure and Trump does not have to comply. What they need to do is investigate Biden and his son. They are the ones that are breaking the law. They are putting bribe money in their pocket so the Ukraine can secure weapons to use against the freedom fighters. I do not know if the people of the Ukraine would be any more free under Trump. But at least Trump is not stuffing money in his pocket while their freedom is being trampled on.

 

[Speedwell]

They are investigating Trump for investigating Biden.

No, that's not what they are investigating Trump for.

 

[Speedwell]

If they want a investigation then they have to vote to have a investigation.

No, they can investigate without a vote. The Constitution only requires a vote for impeachment, not for investigation.

 

[wing2000]

I doubt it. In the Bible the people wanted a King, even though that was never God's plan. Still He allowed them to have what they want so they could see what a disaster it was going to be.

It's funny you should cite that as our nation's founders explicitly did not want a King:


"Impeachment comes from British constitutional history. The process evolved from the 14th century as a way for parliament to hold the king’s ministers accountable for their public actions. Impeachment, as Alexander Hamilton of New York explained in Federalist 65, varies from civil or criminal courts in that it strictly involves the “misconduct of public men, or in other words from the abuse or violation of some public trust.” Individual state constitutions had provided for impeachment for “maladministration” or “corruption” before the U.S. Constitution was written. And the founders, fearing the potential for abuse of executive power, considered impeachment so important that they made it part of the Constitution even before they defined the contours of the presidency."

Impeachment | US House of Representatives: History, Art & Archives

 

[wing2000]

In the constitution, you should read it sometime.

You obviously have not read it.

 

[TLK Valentine]

No, they can investigate without a vote. The Constitution only requires a vote for impeachment, not for investigation.

But Donald requires a vote for investigation, and Donald trumps the Constitution.

 

[joshua 1 9]

You obviously have not read it.

I was going by what Pat Robertson said on his program yesterday. He graduated near the top of his class at Yale Law School in 1955. What law school did you graduate from?

 

[essentialsaltes]

My favorite detail of all of this stonewalling:

"Wow, OK," the judge responded after a DOJ attorney suggested that a Watergate case granting Congress access to grand jury material was wrongly decided.

 

[SimplyMe]

In the constitution, you should read it sometime. It is really pretty interesting.

I have read it, thanks. Nowhere does it state that the House must take a vote prior to investigating a president to determine if he should be impeached. If you saw it there, what is the exact quote?

The house has the power and they have to vote. The speaker of the house does not have the power on her own to do anything. If they want a investigation then they have to vote to have a investigation.

Again, where does it state that?

In a court of law you have to have a grand jury before you can bring charges against a person.

Yes, and when the committee forwards their results to the full House, the full House will sit as a grand jury to determine if they should impeach (indict the President). What you are basically saying is that a grand jury has to vote before the police can even investigate. It makes no sense, at all.

There is nothing the liberals are going to be able to do to stop Trump. I am sure they are going to try, but it will all come to nothing. It surprises me that they have taken obstruction to the level they have. What they do not seem to realize is they are setting their own standard and they are going to have to live by the standard that they are setting. We have to be very careful how we treat people because that sets the standard for how others are going to treat us.

We'll see what happens but, at the moment, things seem to be getting worse for Trump daily. Of course, there is a long way yet to go.

 

[stevil]

If they want to investigate Trump, then they need to vote on that. The speaker does not have the power or the authority to do that on her own.

What is your source with regards to the process for an impeachment investigation?
The above is an assertion, but it doesn't reference any source with regards to what is the official process.

The Guardian provides the White House and Pelosi conflicting claims on this process
White House refusal to comply with Democrat demands sets up bitter fight over impeachment inquiry
the White House objects that the House did not formally vote to begin the impeachment inquiry, breaking with precedent set in the inquiries into Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton.

Pelosi has insisted the House is well within its rules to conduct oversight of the executive branch under the constitution regardless of a vote.

So who is correct? The White house or Pelosi?
From NBC News
White House refuses to cooperate with impeachment investigation
There is little in the Constitution outlining how impeachment should be carried out. The document merely states broadly that the House "shall have the sole Power of Impeachment" and that "the Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.”

It seems that the White House are trying to invent rules of engagement that don't exist and are trying to give itself (the Executive Branch) authority on the impeachment process (which is an independent Congress process of oversight).
White House refuses to cooperate with impeachment investigation
If the White House does not comply, Democrats have said they would not consider contempt or any other penalties, instead using the noncompliance as evidence of obstruction for impeachment.

Curiously we are now getting claims that this is a partisan ploy or a kangaroo court
Trump says he blocked ambassador's testimony and attacks 'kangaroo court'
Donald Trump said he prevented the US ambassador to the European Union, Gordon Sondland, from testifying to congressional impeachment hearings, calling them a “kangaroo court”.

Trump calls Pelosi’s impeachment move ‘witch hunt garbage’ and ‘presidential harassment’
A Trump tweet
This is nothing more than a continuation of the Greatest and most Destructive Witch Hunt of all time!

Obviously a politician under attack will make these claims trying to discredit any investigation into his own conduct. The same thing happened with the Richard Nixon saga
Impeachment process against Richard Nixon - Wikipedia
statements from White House officials grew increasingly more scathing, the overall impeachment inquiry was derided as a "partisan witch-hunt" and the committee's proceedings derided as "a kangaroo court."

What they need to do is investigate Biden and his son.

Biden and his son aren't in office. They aren't part of the executive branch. How does it come to be a Congress responsibility to investigate Biden and his son?

And if it were their responsibility, why couldn't they investigate president Trump as well as the Bidens? Why would it have to be one or the other?

 

[wing2000]

I was going by what Pat Robertson said on his program yesterday. He graduated near the top of his class at Yale Law School in 1955. What law school did you graduate from?

I don't need to go to Law school to understand this language:

Section 1
5: The House of Representatives shall chose their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

6: The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Section 4
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Constitution of the United States - We the People

btw, you might want to take your legal advice from someone other than Pat Robertson

 

[joshua 1 9]

Section 1
5: The House of Representatives shall chose their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

This clearly says the HOUSE has sole power of Impeachment, NOT the Speaker and other Officers. None of this matters because they will never get the 2/3 vote needed for impeachment. This is just a political move to accuse Trump and try to get him to look bad. They are grasping at straws because they know he is going to win this election and there is not a lot they can do about that. But they are not going to go down without a fight.

 

[wing2000]

This clearly says the HOUSE has sole power of Impeachment, NOT the Speaker and other Officers. None of this matters because they will never get the 2/3 vote needed for impeachment. This is just a political move to accuse Trump and try to get him to look bad. They are grasping at straws because they know he is going to win this election and there is not a lot they can do about that. But they are not going to go down without a fight.

...and for the umpteenth time.

The entire house will eventually take a vote for or against impeachment after the impeachment inquiry is concluded.