Impeachment Hearings

[*michaelsean*]

So someone help me here. why don't the Republicans want witnesses? I imagine they could roll out a bunch that could say Trump did nothing wrong. Are they afraid of new stuff?

[GMDino]

(01-08-2020, 10:24 AM)michaelsean Wrote: So someone help me here.  why don't the Republicans want witnesses? I imagine they could roll out a bunch that could say Trump did nothing wrong.  Are they afraid of new stuff?

Maybe they can't find anyone that will say Trump did nothing wrong while under oath.

And they may be afraid of new stuff.

The Democrats have spent years saying the justice system wasn't fair to certain segments of society....and now the gop seems to feel the same when they feel it isn't being fair to them.

[BmorePat87]

(01-08-2020, 10:24 AM)michaelsean Wrote: So someone help me here.  why don't the Republicans want witnesses? I imagine they could roll out a bunch that could say Trump did nothing wrong.  Are they afraid of new stuff?

As we get more and more evidence, it's becomes increasingly damning and a cover up is uncovered. It's hard to argue that this is a hoax or nothing or that the real issue is Hunter Biden and the Whistleblower when more and more evidence shows clear as day abuse of power. It's why the meager defenses we saw here have outright ended and Trump defenders are arguing about polls and optics now instead of the actual abuse of power.

The latest leak shows that the DOJ chose to redact the parts of the email that showed that the OMB told the Pentagon that the hold is coming from the President and the Pentagon warned them of legal issues. This also reveals that the OMB lied to Congress about not being given guidance by the Pentagon.

[BmorePat87]

The Hill has been running a series of hilariously meager oped defenses of Trump, but this one may take the cake.

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/476856-judd-gregg-impeach-pelosi-and-schumer?fbclid=IwAR2L3sjmifipLViEx3xnpPX7aBc2d8n2kjWpPulgZp-Wsl10OeC5Jp93HlE

Former Governor and Senator Judd Gregg, after suggesting that there's no evidence to support impeachment, attacks Pelosi and Schumer for not reading or understanding the Constitution and then suggests that they be impeached themselves.

He then, not realizing the irony, immediately follows it up with "Or they should at least consider having a remedial class on the Constitution, where they are required to actually read the Constitution"

[BmorePat87]

Trump said today that he’d try to block Bolton from testifying if he was subpoenaed lol

[*bfine32*]

Is it too long to hold onto them yet?

[GMDino]

(01-09-2020, 03:45 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Trump said today that he’d try to block Bolton from testifying if he was subpoenaed lol

Well based on this do you think Bolton will have anything to say anyway?

Smart analysis, I fully agree! https://t.co/0YMU7GunDt

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 9, 2020

[BmorePat87]

(01-09-2020, 08:50 PM)GMDino Wrote: Well based on this do you think Bolton will have anything to say anyway?

Smart analysis, I fully agree! https://t.co/0YMU7GunDt

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 9, 2020

Bolton is the biggest hawk in DC. That doesn’t surprise me. He’s saying that as a conservative not in defense of Trump. I don’t think that would change what he may have to say about the Ukraine situation.

[GMDino]

(01-09-2020, 08:54 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Bolton is the biggest hawk in DC. That doesn’t surprise me. He’s saying that as a conservative not in defense of Trump.  I don’t think that would change what he may have to say about the Ukraine situation.

I just think that if Bolton really wanted to testify against Trump he would and wouldn't wait for a subpoena.  

[Belsnickel]

(01-09-2020, 08:56 PM)GMDino Wrote: I just think that if Bolton really wanted to testify against Trump he would and wouldn't wait for a subpoena.  

Look, Bolton is a hawk, but he is also someone who respects the law. I may disagree with his interpretations at times, but I can respect his positions. The reason he doesn't volunteer to testify is because of the administration saying he can't. His viewpoint is that because of this he can't just waltz into Congress and raise his right hand. However, a subpoena could override any wishes of the administration for him not to testify. This has been his stated position all along, even when it came to the House investigations.

[GMDino]

(01-09-2020, 10:15 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Look, Bolton is a hawk, but he is also someone who respects the law. I may disagree with his interpretations at times, but I can respect his positions. The reason he doesn't volunteer to testify is because of the administration saying he can't. His viewpoint is that because of this he can't just waltz into Congress and raise his right hand. However, a subpoena could override any wishes of the administration for him not to testify. This has been his stated position all along, even when it came to the House investigations.

Fair enough and maybe someone can clarify but has the administration actually invoked any kind of privilege or are they just saying people can't go and testify?  From what I've heard there is a difference.

[GMDino]

'I'm not really happy about where the country is right now. I can make a million Donald Trump jokes and I have, but our party and our country is gonna have to up its game. The media is ganna have to ask him harder questions." LG pic.twitter.com/ajCUzu4d76

— Lindsey Graham’s (fake) Conscience (@LGsConscience) January 9, 2020

 

[Dill]

(01-09-2020, 10:20 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: The Hill has been running a series of hilariously meager oped defenses of Trump, but this one may take the cake.

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/476856-judd-gregg-impeach-pelosi-and-schumer?fbclid=IwAR2L3sjmifipLViEx3xnpPX7aBc2d8n2kjWpPulgZp-Wsl10OeC5Jp93HlE

Former Governor and Senator Judd Gregg, after suggesting that there's no evidence to support impeachment, attacks Pelosi and Schumer for not reading or understanding the Constitution and then suggests that they be impeached themselves.

He then, not realizing the irony, immediately follows it up with "Or they should at least consider having a remedial class on the Constitution, where they are required to actually read the Constitution"

This may not be as dumb as it looks.  I think you can count on the majority of Trump's supporters simply agreeing with this--i.e., "these thought leaders know what is constitutional and what isn't, so if they are saying that Pelosi et al. are violating the Constitution then they are likely right. Democrats have been violating the Constitution for years. Somehow." It's not really some legal/political document which counts as "evidence" here, but opposition to Trump.

You are given to reading documents yourself and checking/proofing logical claims based thereon, so this angle might escape you entirely, but not Gregg.

[*bfine32*]

Looks like they're going to vote tomorrow over whether or not to send the articles to the Senate. I guess I don't understand the process. I thought they already formed and approved the articles.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/01/14/pelosi-democrats-meet-before-sending-trump-impeachment-senate-trial/4456208002/

Quote:The House will vote Wednesday on a resolution to send the articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump to the Senate for trial, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced in a meeting with Democrats, according to lawmakers.

[Belsnickel]

(01-14-2020, 12:26 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Looks like they're going to vote tomorrow over whether or not to send the articles to the Senate. I guess I don't understand the process. I thought they already formed and approved the articles.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/01/14/pelosi-democrats-meet-before-sending-trump-impeachment-senate-trial/4456208002/

The process is that after the articles are passed, there is a resolution that must be passed to formally notify the Senate of their actions, which is the "sending it to the Senate" part.

https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/R44260.html

Quote:House Action Subsequent to Receipt of Committee Report
At the conclusion of debate, the House may consider the resolution as a whole, or may vote on each article separately. In addition, "as is the usual practice, the committee's recommendations as reported in the resolution are in no way binding on the House." The House may vote to impeach even if the House Judiciary Committee does not recommend impeachment. Pursuant to Article I of the Constitution, a vote to impeach by the House requires a simple majority of those present and voting, upon satisfaction of quorum requirements. If the House votes to impeach, managers are then selected to present the matter to the Senate. In recent practice, managers have been appointed by resolution, although historically they occasionally have been elected or appointed by the Speaker of the House pursuant to a resolution conferring such authority upon him.

Notification by the House and Senate Response
The House will also adopt a resolution in order to notify the Senate of its action. The Senate, after receiving such notification, will then adopt an order informing the House that it is ready to receive the managers. Subsequently, the appointed managers will appear before the bar of the Senate to impeach the individual involved and exhibit the articles against him or her. After this procedure, the managers would return and make a verbal report to the House.

[*bfine32*]

(01-14-2020, 01:14 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: The process is that after the articles are passed, there is a resolution that must be passed to formally notify the Senate of their actions, which is the "sending it to the Senate" part.

https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/R44260.html

Thx

[BmorePat87]

McConnell suggested that Republicans will call Hunter Biden as a witness if Bolton is called. I mean, sure if them embarrassing themselves by interviewing Hunter Biden is what it takes to interview Bolton, then go for it.

[GMDino]

(01-14-2020, 06:37 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: McConnell suggested that Republicans will call Hunter Biden as a witness if Bolton is called.  I mean, sure if them embarrassing themselves by interviewing Hunter Biden is what it takes to interview Bolton, then go for it.

What is "funny" is the gop won't even ask Biden questions.  They'll just yell about him for their allotted time and accuse him of fraud.

Although I'd love for someone to ask him if he "deserved" that job and him ask the same about Trump's daughter working in the WH.

[GMDino]

And the evidence against Trump and the Gang that couldn't lie straight continues to roll in...

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/14/house-dems-release-new-impeachment-evidence-related-to-indicted-giuliani-associate-098854

Quote:House Dems release new impeachment evidence related to indicted Giuliani associate

It also includes a previously undisclosed May 2019 letter from Giuliani to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.


Updated: 01/14/2020 06:58 PM EST


The House Intelligence Committee released new evidence on Tuesday related to the impeachment inquiry of President Donald Trump, including information turned over by Lev Parnas, an indicted former associate of Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani.

The release, which reflects the unfinished nature of the House’s impeachment inquiry, comes ahead of an expected House vote on Wednesday to formally send the impeachment articles to the Senate for a trial.


“Despite unprecedented obstruction by the president, the committee continues to receive and review potentially relevant evidence and will make supplemental transmittals,” Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) wrote Tuesday to Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), whose panel is responsible for compiling the complete record of the investigation ahead of the Senate’s trial.



The material released on Tuesday contains several handwritten notes, emails, encrypted messages, and other documents that underscore the close relationship between Parnas and Giuliani, who was actively pursuing an effort last year to push the Ukrainian government to announce investigations targeting Trump’s political rivals. The documents also complicate one of Trump’s oft-stated defenses of his actions toward Ukraine.

A previously undisclosed May 2019 letter from Giuliani to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is among the tranche of documents the Democrat-led committee made public on Tuesday.

In the letter, which was obtained from Parnas’ cell phone that was turned over the Intelligence Committee on Sunday, Giuliani asked for a half-hour meeting with Zelensky as the former New York City mayor was pursuing investigations targeting former Vice President Joe Biden — and Giuliani made clear that he was acting with Trump’s “knowledge and consent” and in his capacity as a “personal” attorney for the president. Trump, though, has stated that he was acting on behalf of the U.S. government when he allegedly pushed for the investigations.

“In my capacity as personal counsel to President Trump and with his knowledge and consent, I request a meeting with you on this upcoming Monday, May 13th or Tuesday, May 14th,” Giuliani wrote in the letter, which was obtained from a screenshot contained on Parnas’ phone.

One of the documents included in the disclosure is a handwritten note by Parnas that states: “Get Zelensky to announce that the Biden case will be investigated.” Another refers to Lanny Davis, the attorney representing Trump’s former attorney and fixer Michael Cohen: “Get rid of Lanny Davis (nicely!)”

Both Giuliani and Parnas were subpoenaed as part of the House’s impeachment inquiry. Giuliani has refused to comply, while Parnas was granted permission from a federal judge earlier this month to release the contents of his devices, which were seized by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York when he was arrested, to the Intelligence Committee in compliance with the subpoena.

Parnas was arrested on Oct. 9 at Dulles International Airport outside Washington. He was charged with campaign finance violations involving the steering of foreign dollars into American elections. Parnas has pleaded not guilty to the charges.

Ahead of Schiff’s disclosure on Tuesday, Speaker Nancy Pelosi cited new evidence that had emerged in the weeks since the House impeached Trump on Dec. 18, including new emails indicating that senior Trump administration officials were worried that the president’s order to freeze critical military aid to Ukraine was potentially illegal, to justify her decision to delay the formal transmission of the impeachment articles across the Capitol.

Pelosi has also pointed to other significant developments in Democrats’ case, including former White House national security adviser John Bolton’s expressed willingness to testify before the Senate.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell indicated earlier Tuesday that the crux of the trial will begin on Tuesday, while senators are expected to be sworn in later this week. The House is expected to pass a resolution on Wednesday that names the House’s impeachment managers, triggering the formal start of the Senate’s trial.

Schiff said the new evidence shows that Parnas “communicated extensively by phone and messaging applications” with Giuliani and senior Ukrainian officials.

“These communications, often in Russian, demonstrate that Mr. Parnas served as a direct channel between President Trump’s agent, Mr. Giuliani, and individuals close to President Volodymyr Zelensky,” Schiff wrote.

The evidence also includes a letter from Trump's personal lawyer, Jay Sekulow, in which he indicates that Trump authorized another attorney — John Dowd, who previously represented Trump — to serve as counsel to Parnas and Igor Fruman, another Giuliani associate who was arrested and indicted last year on similar charges.

The White House and Giuliani did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

[GMDino]

Um holy sh*t. This certainly makes it sound like Parnas and co. were actively tracking Yovanovitch's movements. This could explain why Yovanovitch was moved out of Ukraine so quickly. https://t.co/4rBRB06ZGN pic.twitter.com/5Gc8WcGPih

— Natasha Bertrand (@NatashaBertrand) January 14, 2020