Whistle-Blower’s Complaint Is Said to Involve Multiple Acts by Trump

[BmorePat87]

(09-21-2019, 11:18 AM)Dill Wrote: That's a problem. Impeachment is the only real remedy at this point. And it is such a BIG step that it becomes an obstacle to accountability. What if Pelosi is right and the attempt to impeach Trump backfires, giving him another four years? People who don't think that possible still haven't grasped why Trump was elected in the first place.

The Founders never envisioned a president who would so flagrantly violate the separation of powers and the emoluments clause, and they also never supposed someone that corrupt could get sufficient and continued support from an electorate supposed to prefer democracy to top down rule. Those supporters will make it impossible for Congress to pass laws allowing the indictment of a sitting president--at least so long as their guy is in power.

There is still a plurality of the electorate who believe Trump over the "fake news" and think all this talk of obstruction, abuse of power, corruption and self-dealing is just smoke from Hillary losers who want to unseat a duly elected president. "Hate" becomes the cover-all explanation for why people who stand up for the rule of law report Trump's violations and seek to hold him accountable.

A partial remedy would be for the Dems to get off their asses and get some of the current obstruction into the courts so Congress can get Trump's tax records and documents/evidence/depositions from the Russia investigation.

That would help them better sell impeachment to those swing voters Pelosi is so concerned about. They are doing a poor job of that, i.e., of explaining exactly HOW the president continues to violate the law and WHY THAT IS BAD, even if the president is of their party.

You face the same political issues with convicting the President, though, and the DOJ, which is controlled by the President, is even less likely to do anything with that, which makes allowing convictions a pointless gesture. 

The House Judiciary Committee is currently working on what you're suggesting. We had one of their lawyers come to my county's professional development day for Social Studies and present to us about court cases. Since we all were already knowledgable on the cases, he just talked to us about how they apply in his present day work with the committee. He said that the issue they're running into is time. They can subpoena someone and that person might refuse and then they have to wait for the courts to compel them to come. Then they come and they might have the WH claim executive privilege, so then they have to get the courts to rule on that. By the time they finally have to testify, the election may be over.