Impeachment

[O Really]

Do you know the answer on the impeachment trial I was asking above? Would witnesses be compelled to testify, or can they hide behind executive privilege and make it a very long drawn out affair?

Who knows, anymore? A recalcitrant witness could be held in contempt of Congress, tossed in a cell for a while. Trump can claim "executive privilege" but Nixon would advise him that there are limits on that. So yeah, no matter what, it will be long drawn out, hopefully lasting until at least October.

[Vrede too]

I do not expect it to happen, but I would love to see an outing of all of the people that were on one or both ends of the call or otherwise knew about it and did not object. The only law abiding patriots here are the whistleblowers.

The Dems seem to be leaning towards impeaching solely based on the Ukraine call and China statement, and most of the pundits I'm seeing agree with this KISS strategy.

I don't disagree, but it makes me nervous that they're putting all of the eggs in one basket. What if well down this road something comes out that diminishes or confuses the egregiousness of it?

Then, it'll be a little disappointing that there will never be accountability for:
Emoluments clause violations;
Hush money campaign finance law felonies;
Encouraging Russian meddling in the election;
Colluding with Russian in meddling in the election;
Lying under oath;
Other obstruction of justice;
Other corruption.

Not only do these things matter, but Ukraine mostly just condemns 45SHOLE, Rudy and Pompeo while a wider trial condemns many other elected and unelected Repug officials and even Trumpettes in general.

What do y'all think?

[neoplacebo]

I do not expect it to happen, but I would love to see an outing of all of the people that were on one or both ends of the call or otherwise knew about it and did not object. The only law abiding patriots here are the whistleblowers.

The Dems seem to be leaning towards impeaching solely based on the Ukraine call and China statement, and most of the pundits I'm seeing agree with this KISS strategy.

I don't disagree, but it makes me nervous that they're putting all of the eggs in one basket. What if well down this road something comes out that diminishes or confuses the egregiousness of it?

Then, it'll be a little disappointing that there will never be accountability for:
Emoluments clause violations;
Hush money campaign finance law felonies;
Encouraging Russian meddling in the election;
Colluding with Russian in meddling in the election;
Lying under oath;
Other obstruction of justice;
Other corruption.

Not only do these things matter, but Ukraine mostly just condemns 45SHOLE, Rudy and Pompeo while a wider trial condemns many other elected and unelected Repug officials and even Trumpettes in general.

What do y'all think?

I think it's like Pelosi said months ago that they are being pretty diligent in gathering facts; to me, this means a lot of scrutiny into the hotel trump has there in DC as well as his other quasi lesser known sleaziness at the Scotland golf course and the nearby airport with sudden bigly increses in USAF fueling and maintenance there. Who knows what else they've got than they've not mentioned. I think a lot of stuff is still to be revealed and investigated, or if you're a trumper lots of stuff to lie about, pronounce a hoax, and other sleight of mind gimcrackery.

[O Really]

The emoluments issue is still bouncing around in courts. P-Lo would probably add that if she gets a good court win to support it. Campaign finance is always fuzzy, smokey mirrors, a lot of the Russian stuff could be portrayed as did-too did-not, as well as lying under oath. (Trump can't "lie" because if he says it, it's true ). I think the obstruction is strong and getting stronger, though, and I'd like to see that added to the impeachment list. But the real problem is getting the Senate Repugs to vote to remove no matter what evidence is brought forth. The original "can shoot somebody..." could legitimately be changed to "I can turn the US government over to Putin to run, and shoot all the Democratic contenders and the Senate won't vote me out.

[neoplacebo]

Look out! Clear all stations! trump has brought in a king wingnut to assist in his delusional endeavor; it should be funny as hell. Trey Gowdy up next.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-enlist ... 36675.html

[Vrede too]

Wow, Trey looks like a literal Nazi in that pic.

The emoluments issue is still bouncing around in courts. P-Lo would probably add that if she gets a good court win to support it. Campaign finance is always fuzzy, smokey mirrors, a lot of the Russian stuff could be portrayed as did-too did-not, as well as lying under oath. (Trump can't "lie" because if he says it, it's true ). I think the obstruction is strong and getting stronger, though, and I'd like to see that added to the impeachment list. But the real problem is getting the Senate Repugs to vote to remove no matter what evidence is brought forth. The original "can shoot somebody..." could legitimately be changed to "I can turn the US government over to Putin to run, and shoot all the Democratic contenders and the Senate won't vote me out.

Idk, I think these hush money campaign finance law felonies are solid since Cohen has already been convicted of them.

Do you think which charges the House sends over will affect a Senate conviction on any of them? Does "overcharging" make them more Trump-serving and able to get away with it than they already are, or do multiple charges make him more vulnerable?

Probably good I don't decide these things. I lean towards what's "right", not what's practical.

[O Really]

I don't know anything about criminal law except what I learn on ID an Dateline, but I do know that over-charging has let a lot of people walk free. Good example being to reach for a first degree murder charge when you could easily prove, say, manslaughter. I see two important "musts." (1) the charge must be absolutely provable beyond any reasonable doubt; and (2) the action must also be something that nobody, no matter how partisan, can reasonably claim "doesn't matter." Number 2 is obviously the hard part, but it does no good to totally prove Trump shot the guy on Madison Avenue only to have the Senate say, "Yeah but he wuz skeered."

[1 CAT FAN]

Nothing has worked for the leftist, this will fail too.

[O Really]

Nothing has worked for the leftist, this will fail too.

I don't know what "this" refers to, but if it's the current impeachment activity, it has already worked. Keeps Trump on the defensive, looking crazier than normal, eats up his air space, gets him off-message and stalls his destructive agenda. Whether he's formally impeached, or whether he's actually removed doesn't really matter. He's been his own worst enemy.

[Vrede too]

Which hapless "leftist" is 1 FAT CAN mocking? Fail. The rest of us are having a grand time, as O Really suggests. As for Rep. Jim Jordan, only an uber-partisan moron would still cite him:
http://www.blueridgedebate.com/forum/vi ... an#p102605

I watched Jim Jordan on This Week on ABC this morning; it was quite funny. He was wrestling with himself and there was no one there to look the other way. It was pathetic, especially when he asserted that we did not see or hear what we saw and heard trump say about asking China to investigate Biden and/or his son. It reminded me of a particularly bad fifth grade debating contest. Jim lost.

Have you been writing HuffPost articles and headlines on the side?

Jim Jordan Doesn’t ‘Think’ Trump Did Something He Actually Did On Camera
The GOP congressman repeatedly claimed that the president wasn’t serious when he said China should investigate Joe Biden.

Donald Trump's latest tweets!

Only 25 percent want the President Impeached, which is pretty low considering the volume of Fake News coverage, but pretty high considering the fact that I did NOTHING wrong. It is all just a continuation of the greatest Scam and Witch Hunt in the history of our Country!

He lies, as usual. No polls says that as few as "Only 25 percent want the President Impeached [sic]".

https://fortune.com/2019/09/27/trump-im ... t-support/ (09/27)
YouGov/HuffPost 47%
NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist 49%
Harris X/Scott Rasmussen poll saw 44%
SurveyMonkey/Business Insider 45%

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/04/politics ... index.html (10/04)
"average of polls taken since House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced a formal inquiry" 51%

... At no point during the impeachment proceedings against Clinton did anywhere close to a plurality of Americans want Clinton impeached and removed from office. Right now, you could argue that we're already at that point with Trump....

More amazingly, more Americans are in favor of impeaching Trump now than they were at a similar time during the House's investigation of Nixon in 1973 and 1974....

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/01/us/p ... -poll.html (10/01)
Monmouth University 49%

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/0 ... ach-041942 (10/09)
Politico/Morning Consult 50%
Washington Post-Schar School 58%
Quinnipiac 53%
NBC News/Wall Street Journal 55%

[O Really]

I find it annoying that so many people keep forgetting the best two words to respond to most any claim - "prove it." And a lot of it is Trump working against himself. F'rinstance, the Ukraine whistleblower alleged that Trump withheld funds from Ukraine to get his "favor" done. Trump says the funds weren't connected. OK, fine - it is provable that he personally put a hold on the previously approved funds. If there is another reason for doing so, what is it? Wouldn't it have been better for Trump to say "here's why I did it" than to just blow smoke and leave the claim factually unchallenged? But nobody (friend or foe) even bothered to ask what the reason was.

Of course, Trump doesn't usually consider "prove it" because truth or actual fact doesn't matter. Like his "favor." He doesn't really care if Ukraine or China discovers anything in their "investigation." If he can stand up and say "Ukraine and China are investigating Biden for corruption" then he's accomplished his intent. Like the story (that may or may not be true and is probably at least exaggerated) about Lyndon Johnson running for Congress. He told his campaign manager to put out the story that his opponent had been caught engaging in bestiality with sheep. The campaign manager said "but you know that's not true" to which LBJ (alledgedly) replied, "yeah but I just want to see the sumbitch stand up and have to deny it." Whether the story is true or not, what is true is that they didn't really publicize the claim.

[Vrede too]

I find it annoying that so many people keep forgetting the best two words to respond to most any claim - "prove it." And a lot of it is Trump working against himself. F'rinstance, the Ukraine whistleblower alleged that Trump withheld funds from Ukraine to get his "favor" done. Trump says the funds weren't connected. OK, fine - it is provable that he personally put a hold on the previously approved funds. If there is another reason for doing so, what is it? Wouldn't it have been better for Trump to say "here's why I did it" than to just blow smoke and leave the claim factually unchallenged? But nobody (friend or foe) even bothered to ask what the reason was....

I've suggested another possible reason, but it only makes 45SHOLE look even worse:
http://www.blueridgedebate.com/forum/vi ... in#p102162

... Finally, even if an investigation was warranted, it is still both treason and campaign felonies for Biden's political rival to be coercing with military aid a foreign government into launching one. PP will also cower from this again, along with cowering from the fact that the real winner of a military aid to Ukraine suspension is intentionally Putin.

[Vrede too]

Good reference:

Seven misleading arguments against impeachment by Trump and his allies

[Vrede too]

... Yet more fallout from Dolt .45's Ukraine lies, campaign felonies and treason:

Energy Secretary Rick Perry eyeing exit in November

Energy Secretary Rick Perry is expected to announce his resignation from the administration by the end of November, according to three people familiar with his plans.

Perry, who had been Texas' longest-serving governor before joining President Donald Trump's Cabinet in 2017, has largely avoided the controversies that felled others in the administration. But his travels to Ukraine lately have embroiled him in the impeachment inquiry engulfing Trump and his inner circle ...

Energy Secretary Rick Perry subpoenaed in House impeachment inquiry

... The subpoena demands a number of documents pertaining to Trump's call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, during which the president pushed for a Biden investigation, and Perry's potential role in reinforcing that request during a trip to Ukraine. The committees gave until Oct. 18.

The subpoena also demands documents detailing Perry's role, outlined in news reports, in changing the management structure at a Ukrainian energy company, a move that may hold benefits for officials working with Trump's personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani.

"Recently, public reports have raised questions about any role you may have played in conveying or reinforcing the President’s stark message to the Ukrainian President," the chairmen of the committees wrote in the subpoena.

They continued: "These reports have also raised significant questions about your efforts to press Ukrainian officials to change the management structure at a Ukrainian state-owned energy company to benefit individuals involved with Rudy Giuliani’s push to get Ukrainian officials to interfere in our 2020 election." ...

Comments:

Trump picks the best and brightest people ... oops.

"I have 3 documents for the committee. Number one: The transcript of my discussion with the president. Number 2: The phone logs. And number 3...ugh... oops..."

Bet Chris Christie is happy he didn't join the administration.

[Vrede too]

Wavering GOP Sens. Land On A Trump Defense: It's Bad, But He Shouldn't Be Impeached

... The GOP rats are starting to desert the rapidly sinking POSPOTUS ship. Before long there will be a traffic jam at the lifeboats.

Defining 'desertion' pretty loosely, the list is now:
Sen. Mitt Romney (UT)
Sen. Susan Collins (ME)
Sen. Rob Portman (OH)
Sen. Ron Johnson (WI)
Sen. Lamar Alexander (TN)
Sen. Rob Portman (OH)
Rep. John Shimkus (IL)
Rep. Mark Amodei (NV)
Rep. Will Hurd (TX)
Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (PA)
Rep. John Curtis (UT)
Former Rep. Joe Walsh (IL)
Former Secretary of State Colin Powell
Judge Napolitano
Tucker Carlson

[O Really]

I wouldn't put Collins on any list until she actually does what she says, and then probably not for another little while after that to make sure she doesn't renege. Slimeball.

[Vrede too]

I wouldn't put Collins on any list until she actually does what she says, and then probably not for another little while after that to make sure she doesn't renege. Slimeball.

That can apply to most of them.

"Defining 'desertion' pretty loosely ..." - We're seeing more separation from 45SHOLE than we have in 2.5 years, it's still quite early in this latest scandal and lots more will still come from the investigations and hearings. It will be a little difficult now for any of them to backtrack and say he did nothing wrong. I'm not counting on any individual, but I think I may be documenting a GOP trend.

[Vrede too]

Pentagon officials deemed withholding of aid to Ukraine was illegal

This all seems like an awful elaborate and long term plan just to get Ukraine to do an investigation of Biden based on POSPOTUS lies, one that was never going to turn up anything.

Rather, I think the explanation is simpler. Holding up the Ukraine aid was a treasonous service to Putin. Involving Biden, a campaign law felony and also treason, came as an afterthought to our short attention span POSPOTUS.

[O Really]

It will be a little difficult now for any of them to backtrack and say he did nothing wrong.

One would think. But I read an article (I'll post if I can find it again) that theorized that was exactly the Senators' new strategy - admit (proclaim) that he did it and insist there was nothing wrong with what he did. Idiots.

[Vrede too]

One would think. But I read an article (I'll post if I can find it again) that theorized that was exactly the Senators' new strategy - admit (proclaim) that he did it and insist there was nothing wrong with what he did. Idiots.

I'm sure some, most or nearly all will do that until the bitter end, whatever that is. The ones I'm listing are at least clearly saying that what he did was wrong, though some are saying that impeachment isn't warranted. These latter ones may flip towards impeachment as we learn more things like Pentagon officials deemed the withholding of aid to Ukraine to be illegal and hear from folks like, depending on what he says:

(EU Ambassador) Sondland will defy State Department order not to testify in impeachment probe, lawyer says

More problems for the Rudy/POSPOTUS Ukraine cabal:

Former ambassador to Ukraine says Trump pushed to oust her

... Democrats are investigating Trump's pleas to Ukrainian officials to launch investigations of political rival Joe Biden and his family and to probe Ukraine's involvement in the 2016 presidential election. Yovanovitch was recalled from Kyiv as Rudy Giuliani — who is Trump's personal attorney and has no official role in the U.S. government — pushed Ukrainian officials to investigate baseless corruption allegations against the Bidens.

Yovanovitch was removed from her post after insisting that Giuliani's requests to Ukrainian officials for investigations be relayed through official channels, according to a former diplomat who has spoken with her.

In a July 25 phone call, Trump told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy that Yovanovitch was "bad news," according to a partial transcript released by the White House. Neither Giuliani nor Trump has publicly specified their objections to Yovanovitch.

Businessmen with ties to Giuliani lobbied a U.S. congressman in 2018 for help ousting Yovanovitch, according to an indictment made public Thursday following the men's arrest. It alleges that the men leveraged a flurry of GOP political donations to force Yovanovitch's removal, an effort prosecutors say was aided by laundered foreign money....

I'm almost more excited by the prospect of Rudy going to prison than I am by the prospect of impeachment and conviction of POSPOTUS, almost.