Democrats keep impeachment alive by skirting House rules

[cow451]

Yet, curiously, Trump has not faced any criminal charges. Ever, that I know of ... despite being the target of a multi-year criminal investigation.

His adversaries, the ones making unfounded allegations, are now beginning to face criminal prosecution ... for employing "end justifies the means" tactics. Jus' sayin ...

Shows how well he insulated himself from accountability. And why he is so passionate about keeping his financial dealings hidden.

 

[NightHawkeye]

Shows how well he insulated himself from accountability. And why he is so passionate about keeping his financial dealings hidden.

Not buying it.

He's been under IRS investigation for years. I'd be surprised if Obama's IRS hadn't already spent as much money investigating Trump as Mueller did. The IRS never gives up ... and the IRS has had his financial records for years. Jus' sayin ...

 

[cow451]

Not buying it.

He's been under IRS investigation for years. I'd be surprised if Obama's IRS hadn't already spent as much money investigating Trump as Mueller did. The IRS never gives up ... and the IRS has had his financial records for years. Jus' sayin ...

Then why is he so zealous in guarding his returns?

 

[NightHawkeye]

Then why is he so zealous in guarding his returns?

I am too. Nobody needs my personal info.

 

[cow451]

I am too. Nobody needs my personal info.

In case you aren’t aware, you are not President so nobody cares about whether you have laundered money for foreign criminal organizations or been bailed out of financial jams by Saudi royals that are not opposed to murdering their critics.

If you were President, I would care about your conflicts of interest and whether you were lying about being “really rich”.

 

[Fantine]

When Ken Starr issued his report against Clinton, he gave Congress the entire unrrdacted report AND all the underlying evidence.

AG Barr has not done any of this. He made a speech that downplayed the evidence of culpability. Then he waited 30 days. Then he gave a redacted report. Congress has to sue to get the underlying evidence.

Of course, compared to Trump, Clinton's offenses were ridiculously silly.

Perhaps if Trump did not illegally dodge subpoenas there would be no need to move the inquiry to the next level befire impeaching.

The other reason it is necessary is that Trump's offenses go beyond the Mueller scope. Emoluments in Ireland and Scotland as well as the US. Using campaign funds to bribe playmates and pork stars.

I read that if the Supreme Court gives Trump cover, too, as his Congressional accomplices do, we may have to impeach the court.

 

[NightHawkeye]

When Ken Starr issued his report against Clinton, he gave Congress the entire unrrdacted report AND all the underlying evidence.

AG Barr has not done any of this. He made a speech that downplayed the evidence of culpability. Then he waited 30 days. Then he gave a redacted report. Congress has to sue to get the underlying evidence.

Of course, compared to Trump, Clinton's offenses were ridiculously silly.

Perhaps if Trump did not illegally dodge subpoenas there would be no need to move the inquiry to the next level befire impeaching.

The other reason it is necessary is that Trump's offenses go beyond the Mueller scope. Emoluments in Ireland and Scotland as well as the US. Using campaign funds to bribe playmates and pork stars.

I read that if the Supreme Court gives Trump cover, too, as his Congressional accomplices do, we may have to impeach the court.

It sounds like most of what you allege needs to go over to the conspiracy forum.

This thread is about House Democrats making a show of seeking impeachment ... without really seeking impeachment.

 

[Fantine]

They are kind of stuck. They shouldn't have to commit to impeachment in order to get the complete Mueller report and underlying evidence, subpoenaed witnesses, and subpoenaed material. They shouldn't have to deal with lawsuits for subpoenaed information from Deutsche Bank, Capitol One, and New York State--but they do, because Trump has vowed to take any subpoenas all the way to the Supreme Court.

The complete Mueller report and underlying evidence should have been given to them in early April--as has been done with all previous investigations. Unfortunately, the AG thinks his job is to protect Trump--not the integrity of our political system.

Pelosi wants to protect the new representatives from swing districts who might find their reelection campaigns difficult. But I believe that once the new evidence is added to the Mt. Everest-sized pile of investigatory articles and shows already there that independent voters will be grateful that one party at least wants honest government.

I think that the way to go is "impeachment investigation" without commitment. But given the egregious amount of obstruction the House faces, they need to up the ante to get the evidence they need.

 

[Fantine]

It sounds like most of what you allege needs to go over to the conspiracy forum.

The conspiracy here is not the Democrats'. It is the conspiracy to prevent the truth from coming forth. It is perpetrated by the Department of Justice, Mitch McConnell, and Trump's lawyers.

If Trump is so innocent, let him release the evidence and witnesses requested in the subpoenas. With approximately 64% of the American public losing trust in his leadership, this is what is needed to bring the country together, and every delay convinces us more that there is something to hide.

 

[NightHawkeye]

The conspiracy here is not the Democrats'. It is the conspiracy to prevent the truth from coming forth. It is perpetrated by the Department of Justice, Mitch McConnell, and Trump's lawyers.

If Trump is so innocent, let him release the evidence and witnesses requested in the subpoenas. With approximately 64% of the American public losing trust in his leadership, this is what is needed to bring the country together, and every delay convinces us more that there is something to hide.

No. It's not Trump's responsibility to prove himself innocent of every wild assertion Democrats throw at him.

 

[Hank77]

They have to do what they have to do because no GOP backbone has existed since 2016. Archaeologists are stunned by the disappearance of vertebrae in this subset of mammals.

Survival mutation.

 

[Fantine]

No. It's not Trump's responsibility to prove himself innocent of every wild assertion Democrats throw at him.

I agree. Too bad that not a single assertion is "wild." Least of all:
- being listed as Individual 1 in the indictment of Michael Cohen, which resulted in Cohen's imprisonment.
- having ten cases of obstruction of justice listed in the Mueller report, with all the investigatory evidence in the DOJ.

And it is his responsibility to follow the law, including responding to subpoenas. Although he likes to "pretend" that presidents are above the law at all times (assisted by his complicit AG) he is wrong. When a president is "above the law" it doesn't take long for him to become a dictator.

So, in summation: 11 cases of impeachable activity exhaustively proven, and the responsibility of a president to follow the law, including responding to subpoenas.

 

[Hank77]

No. It's not Trump's responsibility to prove himself innocent of every wild assertion Democrats throw at him.

You are corrected, it's never the responsibility of the accused to prove their innocence. If you were accused of a crime it would be the same for you. However, I believe it would be crime/contempt, for you to not respond to a subpoena would it not?

 

[Gigimo]

I'm curious as to why some folks are still saying the Mueller report was "NOT" available to be read in it's entirety? And why some folks still think Barr should have broken the law and released it unredacted

 

[Gigimo]

No. It's not Trump's responsibility to prove himself innocent of every wild assertion Democrats throw at him.

Also just the act of responding to some of those wild assertions gives them legs/some sense of legitimacy when they deserve none to begin with. Sometimes not saying anything is the best course of action, you wait until they've blown it all up/lied out their ying yang then nail them to the wall.

 

[Jonathan Walkerin]

As Tom McClintock pointed out, precedent is the rule ... just as precedent sets law in the legal system.

Bit like publishing your tax records when signing up for the highest office in the country? Got to love those precedents.

 

[NightHawkeye]

Also just the act of responding to some of those wild assertions gives them legs/some sense of legitimacy when they deserve none to begin with. Sometimes not saying anything is the best course of action, you wait until they've blown it all up/lied out their ying yang then nail them to the wall.

Waiting also has the advantage of watching them twist slowly in the wind.

Sometimes you get both.

 

[Fantine]

Also just the act of responding to some of those wild assertions gives them legs/some sense of legitimacy when they deserve none to begin with. Sometimes not saying anything is the best course of action, you wait until they've blown it all up/lied out their ying yang then nail them to the wall.

Do you know how many investigative articles have been written and exhaustively researched--not only here but also in the UK (Guardian) and Germany (Das Spiegel) and other places? Do you know how many books have been written by his former staff members? Do you know that all of these provide corroboration for one another? We are not talking the Enquirer! (Oh, of course we're not talking the Enquirer. The owner of the Enquirer used to buy articles from Trump accusers and then bury them so they would never see the light of day...) Do you know you could probably wallpaper the Oval Office with the gag orders people had to sign when he settled his lawsuits for millions of dollars--divorce suits, Trump University suits, unpaid contractor suits, girlfriend suits, etc., etc., etc.

About the only people who might really believe there is "no" legitimacy to these subpoenas are those who are awakening from multi-year comas.

 

[NightHawkeye]

Do you know how many investigative articles have been written and exhaustively researched--not only here but also in the UK (Guardian) and Germany (Das Spiegel) and other places? Do you know how many books have been written by his former staff members? Do you know that all of these provide corroboration for one another?

Accusations prompt articles and books ... as people seek profit and political advantage.

Doesn't really count as evidence that the accused did anything wrong.

 

[Albion]

It was also precedent for Presidents to not publicly side with foreign adversaries over your own intelligence agencies.

Did Trump violate a Presidential rule in Helsinki?

No. Got another question?