• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

House Impeachment Inquiry

Status
Not open for further replies.

Squeegee Beckenheim

Penultimate Amazing
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
32,124
https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1154820023631962113

Here’s the petition formally announcing in DC federal court the impeachment inquiry in which the House is now engaged. No ifs ands or buts. No ambiguity. The eagle has taken flight.

https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/democrats.judiciary.house.gov/files/documents/FINAL PETITION.pdf

I thought it was probably worth this having its own thread for related news, updates, discussion, etc. as it's not wholly related to any other thread and will likely be ongoing for quite a while.
 
Incidentally, there is some debate about whether this is an impeachment inquiry or whether it's an inquiry to determine whether impeachment proceedings should begin. I'm no constitutional lawyer, so I can't make that determination myself, but either way this thread seems worthwhile as there will no doubt be ongoing news and debate on this subject.

FWIW, here is the opinion of one lawyer: https://www.washingtonpost.com/outl...eedings-against-trump/?utm_term=.f89e6d02400d

Has the House of Representatives opened an impeachment inquiry? That question is starkly presented by a petition that the House Judiciary Committee filed in federal court on Friday. It is also answered by that petition. No matter what certain House Democratic leaders might say about the politics of the matter, there can now be no doubt that the committee is engaged in an investigation of whether to impeach President Trump.

Through its petition, the committee seeks access to portions of the report by former special counsel Robert S. Mueller III that were redacted to protect grand jury secrecy. The panel also seeks grand jury testimony bearing on Trump’s knowledge of criminal acts, Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and Russian connections to his campaign. Finally, the committee seeks grand jury testimony about actions taken by former White House counsel Donald McGahn; this last request probably anticipates the committee’s rumored plans to seek an order compelling McGahn to testify.

It is settled law that House committees can obtain grand jury materials as part of impeachment investigations. So the legal dispute will probably center on whether such an inquiry is underway.

The Constitution itself does not use phrases like “impeachment investigation” or “impeachment proceedings.” This has led some to mistakenly assume that the House is disregarding its impeachment power because it has not yet held a floor vote approving articles of impeachment (or expressly instructing the Judiciary Committee to deliberate on such articles).

But to those who specialize in these matters, that all-or-nothing vision of the impeachment power is mistaken. The Constitution’s text and structure — supported by judicial precedent and prior practice — show that impeachment is a process, not a single vote. And that process virtually always begins with an impeachment investigation in the judiciary committee, which is already occurring.
 
Last edited:
Incidentally, there is some debate about whether this is an impeachment inquiry or whether it's an inquiry to determine whether impeachment proceedings should begin.
Heh, only lawyers would spend so much energy on such a technicality. Ultimately, no matter what it is called, the house will either vote to impeach or not impeach or it may drop the matter entirely.
 
IMO, the main point is to make it harder for the Courts to shut House requests for subpoenas etc. down.
 
Heh, only lawyers would spend so much energy on such a technicality.

Well, the Democratic politicians themselves seem to be going out of their way to say that they're not impeachment proceedings - presumably because they want to avoid the backlash - and I'd imagine that partisan Republicans would be keen to paint this as not an impeachment inquiry.
 
I think it's imperative that the House Judiciary Committee know what is in the Grand Jury testimony.
 
I think it's imperative that the Dems either take the White House or make major gains in the Senate in 2020 or they are gonna impeach Trump all the way into a Dictatorship gift wrapped for him.

Impeachment is nothing (worse then nothing since there will be a backlash) without conviction and a conviction would require getting 2/3s of a 53-45 Republican majority Senate to vote against the President. Not going to happen and it will hand jump a major victory narrative to role into 2020 with.

I get that I'm like the lone voice in this but an impeachment that goes nowhere is more dangerous then no impeachment at all.
 
That's a premature assumption.

Well as I have said many times this is one thing I hope I'm wrong all. I'll eat all the crow anyone seems fit to put on a plate in front of me if it means a viable path to no more Trump.

I really, really, really no snark, full sincerity want to be wrong. I just don't think I am.
 
I think it's imperative that the Dems either take the White House or make major gains in the Senate in 2020 or they are gonna impeach Trump all the way into a Dictatorship gift wrapped for him.

Impeachment is nothing (worse then nothing since there will be a backlash) without conviction and a conviction would require getting 2/3s of a 53-45 Republican majority Senate to vote against the President. Not going to happen and it will hand jump a major victory narrative to role into 2020 with.

I get that I'm like the lone voice in this but an impeachment that goes nowhere is more dangerous then no impeachment at all.

The thing is, there's no clear good (or probably even best) option for the Dems to take now. If they try to impeach and it doesn't work, it might be a bad look, but not impeaching would also give Trump and the GOP full license to claim that the legal investigations into Trump really are witch hunts (and with it that the Dems have gone insane, are trying to destroy the country, etc.). As far as I'm concerned, that easily could have a much worse result. With choosing to go forward with impeachment, Dems can at least roll the dice on having a more positive outcome than inaction.
 
I think it's imperative that the Dems either take the White House or make major gains in the Senate in 2020 or they are gonna impeach Trump all the way into a Dictatorship gift wrapped for him.

Impeachment is nothing (worse then nothing since there will be a backlash) without conviction and a conviction would require getting 2/3s of a 53-45 Republican majority Senate to vote against the President. Not going to happen and it will hand jump a major victory narrative to role into 2020 with.

I get that I'm like the lone voice in this but an impeachment that goes nowhere is more dangerous then no impeachment at all.

The thing is that the Republicans only support Trump because they think it's advantageous to do so. Nixon didn't start losing popularity until impeachment proceedings began.

The question is what will come out during impeachment hearings. Would his tax returns show money laundering for the Russians, for example? Would that negatively impact his popularity? What would potential counterintelligence information reveal?

If his popularity were negatively impacted to the point that he could be seen as a liability rather than a benefit to the Republican party, then they'd turn on him in an instant with a flurry of "who could possibly have known he was a criminal?" statements.

I agree that this is not certain - especially as the ground has been so well-prepared with talk of the "Deep State", etc, but it is one way that impeachment could pass the Senate.
 
Impeaching and losing cannot be worse than not impeaching at all.

If the country is so ********d that a backlash against impeachment against so demonstrably a criminal as Trump should result in calamity, then the Dems would just as well fold up their tent now, bow out, and give over the whole shebang to the fascists.

In any event, principle must win out over political considerations. The Constitution *demands* impeachment. Come what may. Yes, even if it's a losing proposition. To not proceed as honor and right dictates, history will rightfully decry. Especially if Trump wins a second term.
 
I cannot for the life of me see any downside of having an Impeachment Inquiry.

It's not like the Senate is going to agree to anything the House passes, so holding hearings into possible violations by the White House is the only thing Dems can do that is part of their constitutional duty.
You thing voters prefer their representatives to do nothing until 2021?
 
I cannot for the life of me see any downside of having an Impeachment Inquiry.

It's not like the Senate is going to agree to anything the House passes, so holding hearings into possible violations by the White House is the only thing Dems can do that is part of their constitutional duty.
You thing voters prefer their representatives to do nothing until 2021?

I'm saying the potential is there that an Impeachment that doesn't lead to a conviction (which seems to me we're all on-board with happen, nobody seems to be seriously advancing Trump being removed from office as a possibility to even be worth considering) is going to give Trump/the GOP a much stronger "We're clean" narrative then going into 2020 then not.

If we impeach Trump now the narrative he will sell to his followers and a lot of the margin sitters is "Well that proves I didn't do anything wrong; even after a full on Impeachment they couldn't make anything stick to me."

We leave Trump alone (in a legal sense) for now, our odds of beating him in 2020 are about 50/50 if things stay on the path they are now. We impeach him, those odds drop to 1 in 10, tops and we'll have a solid year of Trump and GOP in a "We have to get back at the Dems" mood.

Again I hope I'm wrong about this. I really do. I just don't think I am.

And just so this doesn't come across as paranoia I'm pulling out of my ass, public support for impeachment is not high and isn't getting any higher. Even after the most recent Mueller hearings only 48 percent of self identified Dems and 3 percent of self identified Republicans support impeaching Trump. And both Republicans and Dems are united in that the Mueller hearings didn't change their mind in any real numbers.

That's not exactly overwhelming support for the idea.

You wouldn't even being going into the impeachment with the Democrats all on aboard. Only about half the Dems in Congress support impeachment. I can't imagine I have to explain in too much detail how shaky that make impeachment.

Sure the possibility that the impeachment is what is finally going to get the ball rolling is... very possible. I just think it's naive to pretend it's not risky and idealistic to adopt a "Well we have to do it even if it's self destructive" mentality.
 
No one, not even Republicans, think that Trump is "clean".
And the Senate refusing to convict won't change that either way.

But more importantly, the Impeachment Inquiry is a Backstop should Trump win in 2020: Dems (assuming the hold the House, which I consider very likely), can slow him down with the inquiries, subpoenas, court battles and hearings, so that he won't be able to do as much damage in his second term.
 
Impeachment equals Trump re-election

Br'er Democrat, please don't throw me in the impeachment patch!

If the only reason not to impeach is this imaginary backlash, then hell yeah, let's go all in.

Clinton was a popular president who was impeached for lying about sex after what really was a multi-year, open-ended witch hunt. Trump is an unpopular president who not only broke the law on several matters concerning his election but is a continuing national security threat. I don't know why people think impeachment would play out the same.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom