The Defense Rests: GOP Leaders Reportedly Considering Not Calling a Single Witness

Trump is about to be impeached - legally and in accordance with the US Constitution - for Obstruction of Congress.

Enjoy.

 

I'm afraid it does, since cooperation can't be compelled by Congress over the executive branch without the Judicial branch, and these are not reasonable people.

 

Now I feel even more confident it won't happen. Thanks.

 

It will only fire up Trump's base and get him re-elected, enjoy.

As I said, by the time Durham is done, the whole shady 'resistance' movement will be exposed, and dome indicted, these House clowns are part of that effort.

 

Which will immediately face a SCOTUS determination as to the Constitutionality of one branch obstructing another without the Judicial branch having weighed in.

 

Trump's base was fired up in 2018 and the GOP still lost 40 seats in the House.

Here's your problem - Trump's base is not enough.

 

"Your replaced a very important phrase with a very different one. rahl used the phrase 'relay the information'( I would use the verb phrase ' to refer the complaint' but you turned it into 'direct a subordinate' There is a monumental difference between referring a complaint to a domestic agency who's job it is to make a decision about whether it credibly warrants an investigation, and actually making that decision in the White House and ordering one in a situation where there is conflict of interest."

I don't see any difference. I can't come up with a scenario, other than outright insubordination, that wouldn't require a DOJ or FBI investigator to request help from Ukraine.

"I think you can understand when your boss is asking you to make a decision and when your boss is telling you what that decision ought to be and to get moving!. Trump did far more than either of those when he decided to suggest to a foreign power what its decision HAD BETTER BE, if it wanted a meeting with him, and the release of those funds.

That is an impeachable offense, and it becomes an absolute duty to impeach when the abuse of office involves undermining a future election with his own job on the line!

They would not have to take this vote, if he abused the powers of his office to make money or get his son -in law out of trouble with the IRS. But he is still trying to get foreign powers involved in his election, and Rudy is literally still over there now."


Now, you're clouding the issue by inserting suppositions.

 

So your theory is that Trump will...what? File a declaratory judgment lawsuit to get a ruling from SCOTUS that the grounds for impeachment were improper and thus, he is not impeached?

 

"The Defense Rests: GOP Leaders Reportedly Considering Not Calling a Single Witness"

Trump won't let them, consciousness of guilt

 

The Executive branch can't obstruct the Legislative branch unless the Judicial branch said it in fact did so.

If anything, the Legislative branch impeaching a POTUS without Judicial approval is itself an abuse of power.

 

You deserve to be disenfranchised when the franchise you chose goes under...

 

By the IG report. You know, what is being testified about now.

 

Immediate? It may make it to the SCOTUS, but I don't think it will be immeadiate. Time will tell I suppose.

 

The judicial branch doesn't need to approve an impeachment.

 

I love the high minded debates that we have here on PF. We're a regular Algonquin round table.

 

I was talking about reasonable people watching this thing unfold. Decidedly not people who doctor documents.

 

If the Democrats had real evidence, they would have already deployed it, so no, I don't see anything to change my opinion since I don't think there will be a Perry Mason moment when the Democrats pull out some smoking gun. Do you think the Democrats would have some real evidence that they're holding out on waiting for the Senate trial?

 

No I think trump prevented those with the most knowledge from speaking and held back any pertinent documents. As I expect him to do with the senate trial. But I hope I’m wrong. I can’t see why he’d hold back docs and witnesses that can help exonerate him.

 

To be clear, the smoking guns have smoking guns in this situation. Trump started this all by admitting that he wanted an investigation from Ukraine and China against the Bidens on the front lawn of the White House.

But I think there is more evidence which could produce more of a smoking gun, but it would require testimony from individuals currently blocked from cooperating by Trump.

Bolton, Mulvaney, Perry, Giuliani, Pompeo, or one of the OMB directors come to mind.

 

You forgot Barr. I would love to have him testify on if there are any current DoJ investigations of Biden or Burisma. Trump did refer Zelensky to Barr in his phone call.

 

I try, but I think it's just a repeatedly confirmed fact that Trump is a ****ing moron.

 

Barr came out after that phone call was made public and said he never spoke to Trump about Biden.

But yea, I can see a rationale for getting Barr's testimony as well.

 

Well I remember your stirring legal defense of Jussie Smollett so I realize you are doing the best you can.

 

Barr speaking to Biden has nothing to do with whether there is a DoJ investigation looking at Burisma.

 

I am starting to read more articles where the Democrats are going to impeach President Trump again, multiple times, in 2020.

https://dailycaller.com/2019/12/05/al-green-impeach-trump-more-than-once/