Author Topic: Soft Coup 3.0: Impeachment  (Read 67974 times)

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19460
    • View Profile
Soft Coup 3.0: Impeachment, Dem Exit Strategy
« Reply #150 on: November 27, 2019, 07:40:36 AM »
If I were Speaker Nancy Pelosi and I lost control of this once already by allowing the impeachment inquiry vote, I would end this before Christmas recess.

Make the strongest case for impeachment possible in the Judiciary Committee, vote for impeachment in the Judiciary Committee, and then make the following excuse to not hold a vote in  the full House:

'We don't trust the (evil, corrupt) Republican Senate to do the right thing since they already said they wouldn't convict and remove this President, so we are going to turn our work over to the people instead.  Let the voters decide.'

Prediction of the moment:  There isn't going to be a trial in the Senate.  Therefore there can't be an impeachment vote in the House.

Trump is acquitted - again.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72327
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19775
    • View Profile
Re: Soft Coup 3.0: Impeachment
« Reply #152 on: November 27, 2019, 04:32:55 PM »
" .https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/27/nyregion/giuliani-ukraine-business-trump.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage"

Ukraine seems to know how to dirty up everyone!
and everyone in DC seems to be happy to go there and  play


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72327
    • View Profile
Rudy
« Reply #153 on: November 27, 2019, 10:46:59 PM »
NYT #FAKENEWS:
I did NOT pursue a business opportunity in Ukraine, as they misrepresented. I could have helped them recover $7B in stolen money, but I didn’t. Was paid ZERO.  They attack me because I have exposed their hypocrisy & how they covered up Biden’s massive corruption!

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19460
    • View Profile
ICIG Michael Atkinson Altered Whistleblower Forms to Allow for CIA Leaker
« Reply #154 on: December 01, 2019, 08:12:42 AM »
ICIG Michael Atkinson Altered Whistleblower Forms to Allow for CIA Leaker – His Wife Just Happens to be Connected to Russian Collusion Hoaxer – Fusion GPS

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/11/exclusive-icig-michael-atkinson-altered-whistleblower-forms-to-allow-for-cia-leaker-his-wife-just-happens-to-be-connected-to-russian-collusion-hoaxer-fusion-gps/

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19775
    • View Profile
Re: Soft Coup 3.0: Impeachment
« Reply #155 on: December 01, 2019, 09:35:35 AM »
didn't we already know the whistlesucker law was changed for second hand  person to utilize it ?


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19460
    • View Profile
Re: Soft Coup 3.0: Impeachment
« Reply #156 on: December 01, 2019, 09:48:19 AM »
didn't we already know the whistlesucker law was changed for second hand  person to utilize it ?

We thought we knew it and they thought they debunked it.  We knew that as recently as ___ (May 2019?) the process required first hand knowledge.  Therefore we suspected who changed it roughly when and why.  But finding the documents and turning partisan suspicions into known, provable facts is a BFD, IMHO. 

I did not know that the person-who-did-it’s wife was connected to Fusion GPS!

Small world.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72327
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19775
    • View Profile
Page denies any bias at FBI
« Reply #158 on: December 02, 2019, 07:04:12 AM »
https://www.breitbart.com/podcast/2019/12/01/lisa-page-speaks-doj-has-abandoned-truth-and-independence/

Hillary and team treated with total kid gloves despite a lot of evidence of crimes

and Trump and team treated like guilty terrorists even without evidence of crime

yet as all Dems do , they deny any bias.


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19460
    • View Profile
Impeachment in Name Only
« Reply #159 on: December 02, 2019, 08:16:43 AM »
If this goes through the House with only Democrats supporting it, it is exactly the opposite of what the voters intended for the process.

As it sits today, at least 2 Democrats will no and no Republicans will vote yes.  If that changes by only a handful of votes, this is still a partisan, political exercise certain to fail in the Senate. 

66 million people voted against Donald Trump and we know most of them still feel that way since he has governed exactly as he promised.  In less than one year we have available to us the other way the constitution gives us to remove a President we don't like, an election.  But this can't wait even though we know it can't succeed.  In other words, what House Democrats are doing is censure, not impeachment, no matter what they call it.

They say we have only had two or three of these in history, but in fact we have never had anything like this in our history, a partisan impeachment vote intended only to scar a sitting President during his reelection campaign.

https://www.npr.org/2019/11/18/779938819/fractured-into-factions-what-the-founders-feared-about-impeachment


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19775
    • View Profile
Agree . Trump right in not showing up
« Reply #160 on: December 02, 2019, 02:18:57 PM »
https://www.newsmax.com/politics/robert-ray-bartiromo-house-judiciary/2019/12/02/id/944066/

The Dems and their media mob will go overboard to simply make everything he or his people say or do look bad.
So why go?

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19460
    • View Profile
Soft Coup: Impeachment Report and False analogy to Clinton
« Reply #161 on: December 04, 2019, 07:23:47 AM »
Impeachment Report:  https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/20191203_-_full_report___hpsci_impeachment_inquiry_-_20191203.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------
In the Clinton impeachment, everyone was in agreement on the facts.  The question was what to do about it.  To Dems, it was (only) about sex.  He lied to the country - about sex.  He committed perjury - about sex.  Perjury is a crime, potentially a felony and it does real damage to our justice system.  But it was arguably not a crime against the state, i.e. high crime.  He didn't take the side of our enemies at war, for example.  In that sense Dems were right and he was not removed from office.

Back to Schiff and Trump:  Even if he was guilty, Trump's misdeed(s) also don't rise to the level of high crime on a level like treason.  Even if his motive in pursuing investigation of corruption really was to get Biden, it wasn't a crime.  It was a corruption investigation.  Let the facts fall where they may.  Even if it was soliciting 'foreign interference in an election', isn't that exactly what the Obama administration and Clinton campaign did with no Leftist [selective] outrage?

More importantly, there is no evidence or even testimony of a crime.  They are prosecuting a script made up by Schiff, "I want you to make up dirt on my opponent".  THAT would be foreign interference in an election.  But that isn't what happened.  We know they will never come up with evidence that it did because we already have the transcript. 

[Coincidentally, "make up dirt on my opponent" is exactly what the Clinton campaign hired Christopher Steele to do in his Dossier.  No penalty, no crime, no outrage, no consequence.]

Next is the Leftist (il)logic I call, 'and another thing'.  When the first point is weak and unproven, they move on to another point to add to the first, but it can't add on to nothing, it needs to stand on its own when the first point is bogus.

Look at the report:

Point One in the Report [This needs to be REALLY BIG]: ... drum roll please ... Trump forced out the Ambassador.   OMG!  How could he??!!

Point Two:  Trump trusted his own people over the deep state.

Point Three:  Trump held up military assistance that his predecessor wouldn't give them at all.  He held it up over cooperation on an investigation.

Then they go on to prosecuting the Schiff script, equating what didn't happen with interference, followed by calling out his refusal to cooperate with a witch trial.

Was there any precedent for an administration refusing to cooperate with Congress?  Does a Fast and Furious contempt charge come to mind?
-----------------------------------------------------
Report word search: Pence  = 60.  Why take down just one of them?  What did HE do wrong?
« Last Edit: December 04, 2019, 07:35:29 AM by DougMacG »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19775
    • View Profile
now they delayed till after the holidays; of course
« Reply #162 on: December 04, 2019, 07:36:27 AM »
as they cannot come up with the poll numbers they thought they would
they keep pushing it back

still debating whether to hold vote while all the while having their operative pollsters
trying to figure out the best POLITICAL outcome.

This is NOTHING about their phony "CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY", or "CRISES" , or even more silly , "UPHOLDING THE RULE OF LAW".


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19460
    • View Profile
Impeachment, Judiciary Committee Hearings
« Reply #163 on: December 04, 2019, 09:16:34 AM »
OBJECTION: Your Honor, the question requires a conclusion to be made by the witness.

OBJECTION: Your Honor, the question assumes facts not in evidence.

OBJECTION: Your Honor, counsel is misstating the evidence.

They found 3 'experts' who agree with them and one who hates Trump but disagrees on impeachment.  The first round of this is a loser.  Odd what they don't ask the person who disagrees.  The optics of showing just one side are glaring.  The answers to all questions make it all look scripted.  There was not a question asked where they didn't already know the answer.  They were chosen to testify specifically for their view on this.  Facts are narrowed by the 'witnesses' to fit the crime accused.   MANY hypotheticals are presented that don't  match the facts here.

The cross examination MIGHT be interesting.  At least it won't likely be scripted.
------
Prof Jonathon Turley:  "This isn't improvisational jazz."

« Last Edit: December 04, 2019, 09:41:44 AM by DougMacG »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72327
    • View Profile
Re: Soft Coup 3.0: Impeachment
« Reply #164 on: December 04, 2019, 12:05:53 PM »
Doug:

Really like your Post 161:

"Even if his motive in pursuing investigation of corruption really was to get Biden, it wasn't a crime."

EXACTLY SO!  Very pithy!  The only change I would make would be to say "Not only was it not a crime, it was entirely legally correct.  America's President is our number one law enforcement officer, and going after possible corruption of an American Vice President in the commission of his duties is correct and proper.


[Coincidentally, "make up dirt on my opponent" is exactly what the Clinton campaign hired BRITISH SPY Christopher Steele to do in his Dossier WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE RUSSIANS.  No penalty, no crime, no outrage, no consequence.]

Separately some good points made in this surprisingly rational piece on the NBC site:

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/impeachment-report-house-democrats-too-muddled-change-any-minds-ncna1095636

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72327
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19775
    • View Profile
Pam Karlan
« Reply #166 on: December 04, 2019, 02:56:25 PM »
self described , "snarky, bisexual, Jewish women"

and of course Obama and Clinton donor:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pamela_S._Karlan

Breitbart poster who apparently worked with her states some of her claims dishonest:

https://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/dishonest-witness-pam-karlan-latest-act-at-impeachment-circus/

rickn

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 141
    • View Profile
Re: Soft Coup 3.0: Impeachment
« Reply #167 on: December 05, 2019, 12:34:39 PM »
Clearly, Prof Karlan did not thoroughly research her snarky attempt at humor.  If so, she would have realized that Barron Trump is named after Barron Hilton, the son of Conrad Hilton who succeeded his father as CEO of Hilton Hotels.  She needs a refresher course on proper names and homonyms. 

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19460
    • View Profile
Re: Soft Coup 3.0: Impeachment
« Reply #168 on: December 05, 2019, 11:17:07 PM »
If I understand speaker Pelosi correctly, she is saying that the House Democratic majority is a co-equal branch with the Trump White House. That is not right. The House  is only one chamber of the co equal, legislative branch. More accurately, what the Democrat house majority house and Republican majority Senate can agree on, is a co-equal branch with the Trump White House, roughly speaking.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2019, 11:23:55 PM by DougMacG »


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19775
    • View Profile
yup, the Larry show
« Reply #170 on: December 08, 2019, 09:59:19 AM »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72327
    • View Profile
Re: Soft Coup 3.0: Impeachment
« Reply #171 on: December 09, 2019, 12:24:20 PM »

rickn

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 141
    • View Profile
Re: Soft Coup 3.0: Impeachment
« Reply #172 on: December 09, 2019, 12:32:27 PM »
https://www.justice.gov/usao-ct/pr/statement-us-attorney-john-h-durham


This is a very quiet big deal.

And the media will try and keep it very "quiet."  Unless you meant "quite."

"Hello Brennan, Clapper, and the rest of you non-DOJ sources who hoped the DOJ would be your cutout.  We know that it wasn't just the DOJ that was involved."

rickn

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 141
    • View Profile
Horowitz Report in Context
« Reply #173 on: December 09, 2019, 12:34:57 PM »
And the Attorney General also releases a statement.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/statement-attorney-general-william-p-barr-inspector-generals-report-review-four-fisa



https://www.justice.gov/usao-ct/pr/statement-us-attorney-john-h-durham


"This is a very quiet big deal."


https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/12/some-call-it-performance-failure.php


"In the same vein.  I think Durham’s press release, in tandem with Barr’s, signals interesting stuff to come.  Like the Horowitz report, I don’t think it makes sense to hope for a silver bullet.  But I’d be willing to bet we’ll recognize some of the names referred for prosecution.  And I’ll also bet that the Durham report will be scathing."


https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/horowitz-report-cia-rejected-steele-dossier-as-internet-rumor


"Of course, Brennan took it as gospel, or pretended to.  And he raced to brief Harry Reid so he could engineer leaks against Trump."

« Last Edit: December 09, 2019, 03:56:39 PM by Crafty_Dog »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19775
    • View Profile
dershowitz on levin on "obstruction of congress"
« Reply #174 on: December 10, 2019, 07:09:40 AM »
both agree there is no such thing as obstruction of Congress by a President?

by the same rational Trump could accuse Congress of obstruction of the executive branch

the branches are co equal; trump doesn't have to simply bend to the will of Congress.........

the judicial branch is the arbiter.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19775
    • View Profile


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19775
    • View Profile
Larry the lib
« Reply #177 on: December 12, 2019, 08:24:37 AM »
Larry Trib(al)

defending *his* scheme:


https://www.yahoo.com/news/laurence-tribe-gop-impeachment-trump-085137976.html

why did he go into congress as one of the dem experts on impeachment.
he obviously has been one of the forces pushing this since the day Trump was elected
I would love to see him and Prof. Dershowitz debate............


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19460
    • View Profile
Re: Larry the lib
« Reply #178 on: December 12, 2019, 08:31:00 AM »
ccp:
Larry Trib(al)   ...
I would love to see him and Prof. Dershowitz debate............
-----------

This is from June, before 'the phone call'.  Funny to see Tribe favored impeachment before the offense occurred.

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/harvard-law-scholars-tribe-and-dershowitz-take-impeachment-duel-to-twitter/

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19460
    • View Profile
Re: Soft Coup 3.0: Impeachment vote coming, articles
« Reply #179 on: December 12, 2019, 09:54:50 AM »
This morning I wrote again to my 'centrist' 'moderate' swing district Representative (Dean Phillips, D-MN3) to share my ideas on impeachment.  In a way, I hope he votes wrong, exposing his own naked partisanship.  If he gets this right, let the voters decide, he divides his own party.  What he should do is split with his party and then leave it if he is truly independent.  He isn't and he won't.

Funny that "abuse of power" is soon what Democrats will be charged with.  Let's see how they like it.
---------------------
Media montage on Rush L just now:  "a handful of Democrats are getting cold feet"

Is it cold feet, bad polling numbers, or just tired of being wrong - on everything?
---------------------
Future trivia question, here are the articles of impeachment:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/12/10/read-full-text-articles-impeachment-against-donald-trump/4382795002/

Article I: Abuse of power
The Constitution provides that the House of Representatives "shall have the sole Power of Impeachment and that the President shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors". In his conduct of the office of President of the United States—and in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed—Donald J. Trump has abused the powers of the Presidency, in that:

Story Continued Below

Using the powers of his high office, President Trump solicited the interference of a foreign government, Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election. He did so through a scheme or course of conduct that included soliciting the Government of Ukraine to publicly announce investigations that would benefit his reelection, harm the election prospects of a political opponent, and influence the 2020 United States Presidential election to his advantage. President Trump also sought to pressure the Government of Ukraine to take these steps by conditioning official United States Government acts of significant value to Ukraine on its public announcement of the investigations. President Trump engaged in this scheme or course of conduct for corrupt purposes in pursuit of personal political benefit. In so doing, President Trump used the powers of the Presidency in a manner that compromised the national security of the United States and undermined the integrity of the United States democratic process. He thus ignored and injured the interests of the Nation.

President Trump engaged in this scheme or course of conduct through the following means:

(1) President Trump—acting both directly and through his agents Within and Outside the United States Government—corruptly solicited the Government of Ukraine to publicly announce investigations into—

(A) a political opponent, former Vice President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.; and

(B) a discredited theory promoted by Russia alleging that Ukraine—rather than Russia—interfered in the 2016 United States Presidential election.

(2) With the same corrupt motives, President Trump—acting both directly and through his agents within and outside the United States Government–conditioned two official acts on the public announcements that he had requested—

Story Continued Below
(A) the release of $391 million of United 5 States taxpayer funds that Congress had appropriated on a bipartisan basis for the purpose of providing vital military and security assistance to Ukraine to oppose Russian aggression and which President Trump had ordered suspended; and

(B) a head of state meeting at the White House, which the President of Ukraine sought to demonstrate continued United States support for the Government of Ukraine in the face of Russian aggression.

(3) Faced with the public revelation of his actions, President Trump ultimately released the military and security assistance to the Government of Ukraine, but has persisted in openly and corruptly urging and soliciting Ukraine to undertake investigations for his personal political benefit.

MOST READ

Louie Gohmert
CONGRESS

GOP Rep. Louie Gohmert publicly identifies person purported to be whistleblower
Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin
WHITE HOUSE

Judge rejects government’s motion to toss suit over missing Trump-Putin meeting notes
Pete Buttigieg
2020 ELECTIONS

The left nukes Buttigieg over McKinsey work
Mike Pence
IMPEACHMENT

Pence rejects calls to declassify new impeachment testimony
US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia
LEGAL

U.S. quietly drops 2 more prosecutions linked to Trump Iran prisoner swap

Previous Slide
Next Slide
These actions were consistent with President Trump's previous invitations of foreign interference in United States elections.

In all this, President Trump abused the powers of the Presidency by ignoring and injuring national security and other vital national interests to obtain an improper personal political benefit. He has also betrayed the Nation by abusing his high office to enlist a foreign power in corrupting democratic elections.

Wherefore President Trump, by such conduct, has demonstrated that he will remain a threat to national security and the Constitution if allowed to remain in office, and has acted in a manner grossly incompatible with self- governance and the rule of law. President Trump thus warrants impeachment and trial, removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States.

Article II: Obstruction of Congress
The Constitution provides that the House of Representatives "shall have the sole Power of Impeachment" and that the President "shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors". In his conduct of the office of President of the United States—and in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed—

Story Continued Below
Donald J. Trump has directed the unprecedented, categorical, and indiscriminate defiance of subpoenas issued by the House of Representatives pursuant to its sole Power of Impeachment. President Trump has abused the powers of the Presidency in a manner offensive to, and subversive of, the Constitution, in that:

The House of Representatives has engaged in an impeachment inquiry focused on President Trump's corrupt solicitation of the Government of Ukraine to interfere in the 2020 United States Presidential election. As part of this impeachment inquiry, the Committees undertaking the investigation served subpoenas seeking documents and testimony deemed vital to the inquiry from various Executive Branch agencies and offices, and current and former officials.

In response, without lawful cause or excuse, President Trump directed Executive Branch agencies, offices, and officials not to comply with those subpoenas. President Trump thus interposed the powers of the Presidency against the lawful subpoenas of the House of Representatives, and assumed to himself functions and judgments necessary to the exercise of the "sole Power of Impeachment" vested by the Constitution in the House of Representatives.
President Trump abused the powers of his high office through the following means:

(1) Directing the White House to defy a lawful subpoena by withholding the production of documents sought therein by the Committees.

(2) Directing other Executive Branch agencies and offices to defy lawful subpoenas and withhold the production of documents and records from the Committees—in response to which the Department of State, Office of Management and Budget, Department of Energy, and Department of Defense refused to produce a single document or record.

Story Continued Below
(3) Directing current and former Executive Branch officials not to cooperate with the Committees—in response to which nine Administration officials defied subpoenas for testimony, namely John Michael "Mick" Mulvaney, Robert B. Blair, John A. Eisenberg, Michael Ellis, Preston Wells Griffith, Russell T. Vought, Michael Duffey, Brian McCormack, and T. Ulrich Brechbuhl.

These actions were consistent with President Trump's previous efforts to undermine United States Government investigations into foreign interference in United States elections.

Through these actions, President Trump sought to arrogate to himself the right to determine the propriety, scope, and nature of an impeachment inquiry into his own conduct, as well as the unilateral prerogative to deny any and all information to the House of Representatives in the exercise of its "sole Power of Impeachment". In the history of the Republic, no President has ever ordered the complete defiance of an impeachment inquiry or sought to obstruct and impede so comprehensively the ability of the House of Representatives to investigate "high Crimes and Misdemeanors". This abuse of office served to cover up the President's own repeated misconduct and to seize and control the power of impeachment and thus to nullify a vital constitutional safeguard vested solely in the House of Representatives.

In all of this, President Trump has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice, and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.

Wherefore, President Trump, by such conduct, has demonstrated that he will remain a threat to the Constitution if allowed to remain in office, and has acted in a manner grossly incompatible with self-governance and the rule of law. President Trump thus warrants impeachment and trial, removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2019, 10:08:56 AM by DougMacG »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19460
    • View Profile
Re: Soft Coup 3.0: Unconstitutional Impeachment BY ALAN DERSHOWITZ
« Reply #180 on: December 13, 2019, 04:40:58 AM »
https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/473849-two-house-articles-of-impeachment-fail-to-meet-constitutional-standards

House Democrats have announced the grounds of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress on which they plan to seek the impeachment of President Trump. Neither of these proposed articles satisfy the express constitutional criteria for an impeachment, which are limited to “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” Neither are high or low crimes or misdemeanors. Neither are mentioned within the Constitution.

Both are so vague and open ended that they could be applied in partisan fashion by a majority of the House against almost any president from the opposing party. Both are precisely what the Framers had rejected at their Constitutional Convention. Both raise the “greatest danger,” in the words of Alexander Hamilton, that the decision to impeach will be based on the “comparative strength of parties,” rather than on “innocence or guilt.”

That danger is now coming to pass, as House Democrats seek for the first time in American history to impeach a president without having at least some bipartisan support in Congress. Nor can they find any support in the words of the Constitution, or in the history of its adoption. A majority of the House is simply making it up as they go along in the process, thus placing themselves not only above the law but above the Constitution.

ADVERTISEMENT
In doing this, they follow the view of Representative Maxine Waters who infamously declared that, when it comes to impeachment, “there is no law.” From her view, shared by some others, the criteria for impeaching a president is whatever a majority of the House says it is, regardless of what the Constitution mandates. This reductionistic and lawless view confuses what a majority of the House could get away with, if there is no judicial review, and what the mandated duty of all House members is, which is to support, defend, and apply the Constitution as written, not as it can be stretched to fit the actions of an opposition or controversial president.

If the House votes to impeach President Trump on grounds not authorized by the Constitution, its action, in the words of Hamilton, is void. As he put it in the Federalist Papers, “no legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid.” If this is indeed the case, then the Senate will be confronted with a constitutional dilemma, if and when it will receive a void and invalid impeachment. It will have to decide whether to proceed with a trial of charges that are unconstitutional and therefore are void.

An analogy to consider from ordinary criminal cases may be imperfect but informative. If a grand jury were to indict a citizen on an unconstitutional “crime,” like marrying a person of a different race, the trial judge would immediately dismiss the indictment and refuse to subject the defendant to a trial. Indeed, the House plays a role similar to that of a grand jury in the impeachment context, and the Senate plays a role similar to the trial court. In the presidential impeachment context, the chief justice of the Supreme Court presides and rules on the legal and evidentiary issues.

This is all uncharted ground, and it is difficult to predict how it will play out in the short term. In the long term, it is highly unlikely that President Trump will be removed by a two-thirds vote in the Senate controlled by Republicans. However, in the meantime, the unconstitutional action by a majority of the House to impeach a president on grounds not specified in the Constitution will certainly do considerable damage to the rule of law.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19775
    • View Profile
Re: Soft Coup 3.0: Impeachment
« Reply #181 on: December 13, 2019, 06:11:45 AM »
yesterday some D congresswomen was giving her speech
saying don't pay any attention to the parade of constitutional lawyers who are trying to distract by saying the impeachment is not within the framework of the Constitution

the DNC way of saying only listen to Larry the lib - and Gerhardt , Feldman, and Karlan.

listen to THEIR constitutional lawyers who are truth sayers
and blow off the opinions of others who are just muddying the waters here.

now move along

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19460
    • View Profile
Re: Soft Coup 3.0: Impeachment
« Reply #182 on: December 13, 2019, 06:59:18 AM »
yesterday some D congresswomen was giving her speech
saying don't pay any attention to the parade of constitutional lawyers who are trying to distract by saying the impeachment is not within the framework of the Constitution

the DNC way of saying only listen to Larry the lib - and Gerhardt , Feldman, and Karlan.

listen to THEIR constitutional lawyers who are truth sayers
and blow off the opinions of others who are just muddying the waters here.

now move along

I listened off and on all day trying to figure out if this is a parody.

There are such simple responses possible to every point made on impeachment.  Did Trump say the investigation he wanted was only about his reelection? Of course not. Is there any other possible, legitimate, national public purpose for wanting an investigation of corruption that connects the two countries?  Yes, it's his sworn responsibility as President. 

Is there any precedent of any other administration not asking how high when the House led by the other party asks them to jump?  Yes.  cf. Pres. Obama, Eric Holder, fast and furious, IRS targeting, Benghazi docs, HRC emails.   Did the House exhaust every other remedy first, e.g. the courts?  No.

When your opponent says this process is "rigged and rushed", have you done everything possible to make sure that claim cannot and does not stick?   No.  Just the opposite.  It's rigged, it's rushed and it's blatant. 

They wanted so badly to vote yesterday, and then suddenly they didn't.

How can Democrats who have never admitted they are wrong stop their own train wreck?

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19775
    • View Profile
Re: Soft Coup 3.0: Impeachment
« Reply #183 on: December 13, 2019, 07:58:46 AM »
" .They wanted so badly to vote yesterday, and then suddenly they didn't."

now they "voted"

BUT
the vote is to simply move out of Dem controlled *judiciary committee* to the full house and (please God , no) torture us with more grandstanding from more members of  the whole House ( the bartender  ,Green , Hirono, et al) for another 2 weeks
so they can vote a Christmas gift to the Senate.

Interesting I have not seem our old friend Maxine lately .  Has she been out there?




DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19460
    • View Profile
Re: Soft Coup 3.0: Impeachment
« Reply #184 on: December 13, 2019, 09:42:41 AM »
" .They wanted so badly to vote yesterday, and then suddenly they didn't."

now they "voted"

BUT
the vote is to simply move out of Dem controlled *judiciary committee* to the full house and (please God , no) torture us with more grandstanding from more members of  the whole House ( the bartender  ,Green , Hirono, et al) for another 2 weeks
so they can vote a Christmas gift to the Senate.

Interesting I have not seem our old friend Maxine lately .  Has she been out there?

Their grandstanding favors us.  What they can't do anymore is have unanswered grandstanding.  Each time one of them overstates their case (when words come out of their mouths), it is is fodder for their opponents and makes the whole effort look bad.

The guy who must be most nervous right now (besides Joe Biden and every Trump district and swing district Democrat) is Chief Justice John Roberts. 

McConnell could dismiss this in a minute on a majority vote but more strategically he will take the impeachment trial very, very seriously.  Let the House Managers make their full case, while objecting to anything hearsay, conjecture, facts not in evidence, or requires the witness to make a conclusion.  That should take about a half day.  Then put on a defense that takes the rest of the winter, hopefully longer, interrupting as often as possible for judicial confirmations, ratifying new trade agreements, budget hearings, etc., while Bernie, Butti and Trump rallies play out in the heartland.

The whole Biden corruption case is fair game for the defense; it is brought up by the prosecution and part of the context of what Trump was dealing with when these words and events were unfolding.  Democrats also brought up Biden's corruption in China.  Dumb move.  All fair game now.  I don't see how Biden survives all this and I don't see how networks can cover everything for the prosecution and break away from the defense.  Their 93% negative Trump coverage rating is about to collapse in the heat of an election year. 

The Democrats need to find some way to kill this monster they created before it gets to the Senate.  They are unifying the right and losing the middle.  They see their own polling plunge but they don't see an exit that doesn't hand Trump a HUGE victory.  They will have numerous defections in the House even if this passes.  Hopefully Republicans won't.
« Last Edit: December 13, 2019, 09:54:01 AM by DougMacG »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72327
    • View Profile
Re: Soft Coup 3.0: Impeachment
« Reply #185 on: December 13, 2019, 11:04:53 AM »
A key point,  perhaps THE key point, is that the Dems and their running dogs in the Pravdas have gotten away so far with making the request to look into Biden & Son as looking for dirt for personal gain.  That is why in the polls half the country supports impeachment. 

Simply voting down the impeachment quickly runs the risk of affirming the stink of this lie for the general election.

I favor a proper trial, with Schiff, Ciamarello, Joe & Hunter, et al being called as witnesses and let the Dems twist in the wind.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19775
    • View Profile
Re: Soft Coup 3.0: Impeachment
« Reply #186 on: December 13, 2019, 01:09:19 PM »
" .I favor a proper trial"

Rush today was pushing the concept - why bother .  It makes no difference whether is a trial or not - the left media will criticize Republicans no matter what.

The Democrat show in the Congress is not changing any minds
and any Republican show in the Senate will not (likely) either

I can't predict the future but I am inclined after weighing the pros and cons leaning towards Rush's conclusion

Dispense with the bullshit going through the motions and  just end this .  The Media DemParty industrial  complex is going to do what they do no matter what.

Just my take.

Besides SSS (Shifty shyster schiff) , Ciamerello and Joe and Hunter probably would not show up in the Senate.

You really think Joe, and the stripper's boyfriend and father of her child, and Adam are going to show up in the Senate.
no more than Trump would show up in the House.
the whistle sucker would have a phalanx of DNC lawyers surrounding him and he would have mask on and his voice would be altered
to protect his identity........... :wink:




ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19775
    • View Profile
Re: Soft Coup 3.0: Impeachment
« Reply #187 on: December 15, 2019, 04:42:32 AM »
I think I get it.
Trump is playing the Clinton impeachment strategy

new North American trade "deal" . (sell out)
China trade "deal" (sell out)

ready to announce troop reduction in Afghanistan

new announcement every week if not daily like bubba .

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72327
    • View Profile
Re: Soft Coup 3.0: Impeachment
« Reply #188 on: December 15, 2019, 09:29:52 AM »
Why do you say USMCA is a sell out?

Why do you think Phase One of China deal is a sell out? (I share concerns here)


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19460
    • View Profile
Grounds for Impeachment, Obama 2014, IRS Targeting
« Reply #190 on: December 17, 2019, 07:22:13 AM »
Bringing this forward.  No impeachment thread is complete without it, IMHO.  The only possible rationale for not impeaching over this is that it would have failed in the Democratic Senate.  Under the new rules, Obama could have been impeached at least a handful of times.  This was exactly what they allege now, using the  powers of the office to gain advantage in reelection.

https://dogbrothers.com/phpBB2/index.php?topic=1709.msg120465#msg120465

IRS Targeting Scandal
« Reply #1069 on: October 30, 2019, 10:11:00 AM »
Go to page 188:
https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/REPORT%20-%20IRS%20&%20TIGTA%20Mgmt%20Failures%20Related%20to%20501(c)(4)%20(Sept%205%202014,%209-9-14%20update).pdf

IRS Targeting - 700 conservative groups were prevented from raising money and participating (against Obama's reelection and policies) by action / inaction of the federal bureaucracy, while the IRS commissioner was visiting the White House 500 times more often than his predecessor.
-----
Read the detail from Page 188 of the report whose title claims, "both liberal and conservatives groups received the same bad treatment and were targeted by the IRS":
http://www.hsgac.senate.gov/subcommittees/investigations/reports

"104 conservative groups were asked 1552 questions.  7 liberal groups were asked a total of 33 questions.

100% of liberal group applications were approved."

https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/REPORT%20-%20IRS%20&%20TIGTA%20Mgmt%20Failures%20Related%20to%20501(c)(4)%20(Sept%205%202014,%209-9-14%20update).pdf

100% [all] of the 292 groups applying for tax-exempt status whose names contained "tea party", "patriot", or "9/12" were denied tax-exempt status for two years coming into Obama's reelection.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323873904578571363311816922

That's not the same bad treatment for right and left, as alleged in the majority report.

All of this swept under the rug - even by our side.   (

Who reads to page 188 of a Senate Subcommittee Report?  It should have been Article One of Impeachment.  EVERYONE would have seen it there.  He cheated in reelection.  Should have been impeached.  And that's just the Democrats view of 2019.  Where were they then?
« Last Edit: December 17, 2019, 07:25:33 AM by DougMacG »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19460
    • View Profile
Re: The Impeachment will continue , , , "January Surprise"
« Reply #191 on: December 17, 2019, 08:50:36 AM »
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/impeachment-moves-to-senate-get-ready-for-a-scramble-and-a-january-surprise

I was thinking of Trump and Republican moves when I saw the "January Surprises" title, like Trump deciding to testify, but of course it will be Democrats who will keep adding to the drama in the new year.  As Byron York wisely notes, see the Kavanaugh hearings.

The articles were written vaguely, intentionally.  In the eyes of the Dems, further abuse and further obstruction is all relevant.  "This is a crime in progress." 

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has just said that the trial will be limited to the testimony already conducted.  Chief Justice John Roberts will have some say in that; he will err on the side of allowing nearly everything that either side can reasonably argue.  The longer the House Managers' prosecution side takes and the wider it goes, the more time the defense will take to present the other side, while Sanders and Warren (and Klobuchar) are grounded.   

Biden will find his corrupt family business anally probed with a microscope with worldwide broadcast.  America has managed to mostly look the other way so far but this is going to get bigger and uglier.  Bidens' business, Ukraine and China is all relevant to Trump's state of mind when he did (or did not do) what is alleged. 

Speaking of January surprises, how about a Supreme Court vacancy during the trial?

How about a February trial instead of January?  What's the rush?   )

The Clinton impeachment trial of 1999 took 5 weeks plus a two week delay over the holidays.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/12/this-day-in-politics-feb-12-1999-401098

I will not be surprised if Trump takes the stand for the defense.  He is a showman and this is the stage.


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19775
    • View Profile
Re: Soft Coup 3.0: Impeachment
« Reply #192 on: December 17, 2019, 09:31:14 AM »
"I will not be surprised if Trump takes the stand for the defense.  He is a showman and this is the stage."

God forbid!    :-o .

The tweets do enough self damage.

no doubt he will commit under oath perjury.

Is one thing when he denies the sun came up in the morning on twitter but under oath in a Senate impeachment trial.

Let Barr do his thing.






ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19775
    • View Profile
We are all just public servants
« Reply #193 on: December 18, 2019, 06:42:44 AM »
https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2019/12/18/lisa-page-treatment-impeachment-inquiry-public-servants-treated/

like at least one  postal workers and at least one Copyright
employees I knew.

the Fed government employees get more protections than most if not all in the private sector
as far as I can tell

she is so full of phony self pity

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19460
    • View Profile
Re: Soft Coup 3.0: Impeachment in 'Trump districts'
« Reply #194 on: December 18, 2019, 07:32:32 AM »
There is watch today for the vote of House Dems who won their seat in districts that Trump won.  That understates their problem.  Trump is up significantly since 2016, more than the polls say, and was not on the ballot in 2018.  Trump is up 6 points since the impeachment inquiry began, see Gallup today.   House Democrats in next year's contested districts are the ones who should be nervous.  That includes I think any district they won by less than 5-10 points in 2016 or 2018.  Those representatives really should abstain from this vote and say, this isn't what I came here to do.  Just my opinion.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19775
    • View Profile
protecting Democracy
« Reply #195 on: December 19, 2019, 05:48:33 AM »
upholding their Constitutional "duties":

https://pjmedia.com/trending/nancy-pelosi-signals-she-may-freeze-impeachment-after-vote-so-trump-cant-claim-senate-vindication/

this highlights the  phony political gamesmanship and  grandstanding even more.




ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19775
    • View Profile
« Last Edit: December 19, 2019, 07:01:18 AM by ccp »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19775
    • View Profile
Dershowitz first time to my knowledge takes on Larry
« Reply #197 on: December 19, 2019, 05:23:16 PM »
Tribe :


https://www.newsmax.com/alandershowitz/hamilton-pelosi-tribe-senate/2019/12/19/id/946659/


well we know which one gets invited to Martha's Vineyard parties.
« Last Edit: December 19, 2019, 05:38:30 PM by ccp »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19775
    • View Profile
Tribe responds to Dershowitz's claim
« Reply #198 on: December 20, 2019, 07:07:16 AM »
not bringing the impeachment to the Senate is  foolish  on every level!

Tribe says  (I believe it was  HIS idea)  Pelosi is brilliant
and of course McD of MSLSD would enthusiastically agree

From  the author on 'HOW TO END  A PRESIDENCY' .(Trump's of course )coincidentally written and published in past few yrs

https://www.yahoo.com/news/laurence-tribe-donald-trump-impeachment-094014325.html

TRibe Tries to explain that all the evidence should be heard in the Senate (though it was not in the House)

In other words the prosecution's rights should be protected
while Dershowitz's more plausible claim that not sending the impeachment to the Senate is completely contrary to every
legal dogma in innocent to proven guilty

If you are not going to send to the Senate then the case should not have been brought up.
Even as non lawyer or expert Dershowitz positions just seems to be so much more and firm ground
and Tribe sounds like a jilted prof who has TDS trying to twist legal arguments on their head just to get "rid of " *this * president.






DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19460
    • View Profile
Impeachment in Name Only??
« Reply #199 on: December 20, 2019, 08:41:12 AM »
I just couldn't figure out the Democrats' end game.  How can they ride on this freight train to its conclusion in the House, mark and stain Trump, and then stop it on a dime to not let Trump end it in with a Senate acquittal.  I was SO close to predicting this most bizarre act by Pelosi - but missed it.  Pass it in the House, then 'not send' it to the Senate?  What??

I wasted time this morning trying to find that necessary step in the constitution but came up with empty.

 *    "The House of Representatives shall have...the sole Power of Impeachment."
 *    "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."

Sorry, but I don't see a step in between for method of "transmission" required to move it from the House to the Senate.  That has to do with Senate rules and can be changed since no one contemplated this.
 https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-RIDDICK-1992/pdf/GPO-RIDDICK-1992-69.pdf

Now Pelosi has 'delayed' and they left town for the year without sending what they passed to the Senate.  W.T.F.?

It brings up so many questions.  Did the Dem House members know she was going to do this when they voted?  Did the whole group agree on this strategy, impeachment in name only?

They say delayed but these issues are unresolvable, the House isn't going to run the Senate.   So this is it.  It ends here?

Should the Senate modify its rules and just schedule this?  Give the parties notice, under article, Section whatever, the Senate has scheduled an impeachment trial.  ?

But why should they waste time on this?  Move on with the people's business?

I can't believe it but I think this whole ordeal just ended.  It was the Democrats circus.  They own it.  They gave it birth.  They lived it.  They killed it.  They can run on it , or try to run away from it, depending on the district.  We were just kidding?  Trump can deny that impeachment even happened if it has meaning that the House never sent impeachment to the Senate.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/12/trump-impeachment-if-impeachment-articles-are-not-delivered-did-impeachment-happen/

Meanwhile, Trump had a rally, Dems had a debate, the House passed Trump's free trade agreement, the market hit new records, and Santa is gathering reindeer and presents up on the rooftop.

God Bless America.   )
« Last Edit: December 20, 2019, 09:31:13 AM by DougMacG »