Let me start this post with a thank-you note to all those resisters to the republican President Donald Trump’s authoritarian governing style, from the left to the right who have been actively pushing for the House to start an impeachment investigation against President Trump, by campaigning for this step via social media websites including Twitter; making phone calls, sending letters, emails and faxes to US congressional members on a regular basis.
It’s up to all of us resisters to continue to be unified in the one goal of making sure that President Trump does not win reelection in 2020. We want him and his sycophant GOP lawmakers to lose by super huge margins. I, for one plan to join up with an existing campaign to register new voters.
It’s happened. I’m betting that the republican President Donald Trump’s victory dance after the former FBI’s Special Counsel Robert Mueller testified on 7/24/2019 before 2 House oversight committees about his findings as per his 3/22/2019 final report regarding the FBI’s 22 months long Trump-Russia probe, followed by the Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s move to not allow 2 elections’ security bills to be voted on by Senate members, helped the House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to finally be moved to where she gave her stamp of approval for the House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Jerry Nadler to commence an impeachment investigation. Enough is enough.
With the House taking on the mantel of a judicial function vs, its typical role of a legislative body, its power via the US court’s systems to collect evidence and to compel the testimony of key witnesses, is at its zenith, where the courts are bound to be more expeditious, accommodating regarding requests made by House oversight committees.
See: Read the Judiciary Committee’s application.
Here’s the rest of the story…
On July 26, 2019, Nicholas Fandos and Charlie Savage of the New York Times penned the following report, “Impeachment Investigation Is Underway, Judiciary Committee Says” (“In a court filing, House Democrats said they need access to secret grand jury evidence because they are weighing whether to recommend impeaching President Trump.”)
“The House Judiciary Committee on Friday (7/26/2019) asked a federal judge to unseal grand jury secrets related to Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation, using the court filing to declare that lawmakers have already in effect launched an impeachment investigation of President Trump.”
“In a legal maneuver that carries significant political overtones, the committee told a judge that it needs access to the grand jury evidence collected by Mr. Mueller as special counsel — such as witness testimony — because it is “investigating whether to recommend articles of impeachment” against the president.”
“Because Department of Justice policies will not allow prosecution of a sitting president, the United States House of Representatives is the only institution of the federal government that can now hold President Trump accountable for these actions,” the filing told the judge, Beryl A. Howell, who supervised Mr. Mueller’s grand jury.”
“Referring to the part of the Constitution that gives Congress the power to impeach and remove a president, the filing continued: “To do so, the House must have access to all the relevant facts and consider whether to exercise all its full Article I powers, including a constitutional power of the utmost gravity — approval of articles of impeachment.”
“With the filing, the committee’s chairman, Representative Jerrold Nadler of New York, was attempting to sidestep the debate raging inside the Democratic Party over whether the full House should hold a vote to formally declare that it is opening an impeachment inquiry. In effect, he declared, that inquiry has already begun.”
“Too much has been made of the phrase ‘an impeachment inquiry,’” Mr. Nadler said at a news conference. “We’re doing what our court filing says we are doing, what I said we are doing, and that is we are using our full Article I powers to investigate the conduct of the president and to consider what remedies there are. Among other things we will consider, obviously, is whether to recommend articles of impeachment.”
“Other members of the committee were more forward.”
“We’re now crossing a threshold with this filing, and we are now officially entering into an examination of whether or not to recommend articles of impeachment,” Representative Veronica Escobar, Democrat of Texas, declared.”
“Democrats hope that Judge Howell will agree that their request for the grand jury material falls into the same legal category as a Nixon-era precedent under which the committee gained access to Watergate evidence. But there is a difference that could matter: In 1974, the full House had voted to declare an impeachment inquiry opened.”
“The new filing comes two days after Mr. Mueller testified before Congress for the first time about the findings of his 22-month investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and possible obstruction of justice by Mr. Trump. Republicans — and some Democrats — said Mr. Mueller’s lackluster appearance had all but ended the impeachment threat, and they were not convinced the committee’s actions on Friday had changed that.”
“Democrats want to convince their base they’re still wedded to impeachment even after this week’s hearing, but a baseless legal claim is an odd way to show that,” said Representative Doug Collins of Georgia, the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee. He predicted that the legal maneuver would fail.”
“But Democrats who control the panel called Mr. Mueller’s testimony an “inflection point” and are now seeking to add more evidence about what they believe to be serious wrongdoing by Mr. Trump.”
“Mr. Nadler said the committee would continue the investigation during the House’s six-week summer recess, calling additional witnesses and filing a lawsuit as soon as next week to force Donald F. McGahn II, the former White House counsel, to testify unless he agrees to come voluntarily. Mr. McGahn’s account of presidential behavior sits at the center of Mr. Mueller’s report.”
“The 448-page document showed that the Trump campaign welcomed illegal assistance from the Russians in 2016 and expected to benefit from it, but investigators didn’t establish that Mr. Trump had conspired with them in the illegal hacking and dumping of Democratic emails.”
“It also explored several episodes in which Mr. Trump tried to impede the investigation. But the special counsel decided not to render judgment about whether Mr. Trump should be charged with obstruction of justice, citing a Justice Department view that sitting presidents are temporarily immune from indictment while they are in office.”
Link to entire report: nytimes.com/ Impeachment Investigation is Underway, Judiciary Committee Says…
I definitely support the “impeachment investigation” over actual impeachment. As I’ve expressed here and elsewhere, I don’t think the Senate will follow through if his actions are brought before them in official proceedings … and there’s no doubt he would take FULL advantage of his “innocence.”
However, even though I’m happy to see the investigation going forward, quite frankly, I harbor fears that even it will not turn out as many of us hope/anticipate. tRumpsky has foiled so many attempts to bring his nefarious deeds into the open, I wouldn’t be surprised if this too fails.
As I pointed out in my most recent post, I believe he has considerable power behind the scenes.
I truly hope my fears are washed aside as this all goes forward. But at this point, I’m not yet able to celebrate.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I couldn’t agree more. There are serious GOP dark monies backing President Trump and his authoritarian governing style. They were warned in 2012 that their Trumpian GOP Party is dying. Their solution is to allow for a President Trump in order to keep their power and control.
But here’s the reality, peoples can’t win against these evil forces by playing nice. That’s like the frog asking the fox to play nice. Fat chance. The frogs days are numbered. But if 1000s of frogs fight fox, there might be a chance for the frog to prevail.
That does not mean that Dems should get in the mud with GOP but that they fight back hard and smart.
There needs to be a war plan as we are resisters will have to fight to save our US democracy from forces who want to steal our way of life. There’s a reason that GOP Senate Majority Leader McConnell is blocking Senate from passing any and all security election measures.
There needs to be an uprising, huge protest groups just on this issue.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Where, I might ask, is the conscience in our elected representatives? As Nan said, there is no way that the Senate would vote to convict Mr. Trump and oust him from office … but they should, if they were actually operating in the best interest of the nation. There is also no way the House can garner a 67% vote to impeach, as would be needed for actual impeachment … but they should, if they were actually listening to ALL of the people they have sworn to represent, rather than a loud, obnoxious minority. My opinion at this point is that I would love to clean house … blow them all out of office including Trump/Pence and the entire cabinet, the entire Congress, and let’s just start from scratch with all new rules. The first of those new rules would be nobody is eligible if their net worth is greater than $1 million, or if they have any connection with large corporations, particularly the fossil fuel industry. Sigh. Hugs.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is a common area of confusion. For the House members to approve drafted “Articles of Impeachment, it only takes a majority 51% of votes and so articles would easily pass US House of Representatives. It’s in the Senate where 67% of the members have to vote to convict and with this GOP-led Senate, President Trump is very unlikely to be convicted.
But the Senate situation is why it’s crucial for the House Judiciary Committee to investigate the president not for min level required to impeach him but to garner the max amount of evidence to use it as reason to oust GOP Senate mbrs like Senators Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham. It has to obvious that the President Trump would have been convicted by any other Senate.
I’m convinced that this is possible but there’s an added advantage. President Trump sucks all the media attention where the Democratic Party presidential candidates message won’t break through all of his fog.
But this impeachment investigation will garner its fair share of media coverage. Because Rep. Nadler gets the importance of establishing a case of overwhelming evidence against President Trump which will take several months as the neg. evidence gets frequently shared with the public, drip, drip, drip like HRC’s email scandal.
At that point, its time for House to vote on “Articles of Impeachment” and then make the transfer to the US Senate.
Beating President Trump at the ballot box wasn’t going to result in him losing by huge numbers, by following the path of not taking a risk as pushed by the House Democratic leadership team.
Admittedly, Dems have to use all the tools they have to prevail in November 2020, and the impeachment route is only one out of many. While the House is busy working, Dem activists and other decent Americans need to focus in figuring out a way to get around the Senate Majority Leader McConnell to get an election security measure, passed. This will require high level of protests, etc. There’s a lot to do.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Comments are closed.