Maybe it's just me, but I think this is an interesting question.

In the call there was nothing about any quid pro quo at all.

 

As I said
It is clear from Mulvaney and others that a quid pro quo was trumps plan
And trump himself then inserted Bidens into the phone call
So although you can say there was no explicit qpq in the call
It was implied by the events

 

What is perfectly clear from what Mulvaney said is that the Bidens weren't part of the QPQ. And the mere mention of the Bden's pretty much ended any need for an investigation as fully intended I suspect.

 

Congress has the right of oversight.

It doesn't have to be about impeachment or some big investigation - it can simply be about oversight.

If we had an attorney general, those who refuse to respond to congress could be imprisoned.

 

We do have an attorney General which is why this high handed horse crap isn't going to fly.

While Congress does have a right to oversight it does not have a right to micromanage foreign policy.

 

Wait....you just said there was no QPQ. Now you say there was but you're dithering over what the Quid was.

Oh..

No we have Billy the Bagman

 

I was of course referring to The Biden's do try to keep up.

 

Well, at least you got it right that the Executive branch is obstructing justice by stonewalling rightful oversight by congress.

But, congress DOES have a major say in foreign policy. The aid to Ukraine to help them defend against Russia came from Congress. And, it wasn't allocated in order to be used for Trump's quid pro quo on fabricated garbage on a political opponent.

And, regardless of whether his acts in Syria are strictly legal, they're the biggest blunder since the Iraq war. Republicans in congress and high military officias are just plain astounded at Trump's idiocy, unwillingness to get consultation and the magnitude of the disaster that he created.

Today, as Syria, Iran and Russia form their new partnership allowing unobstructed opposition to Israel - who we have considered an ally.

There is no end to the damage Trump does without even asking how stupid it is.

 

Duplicate

 

Nope not over sight micromanaging and not permitted under the constitution...

 

What is it that you think congress has "micromanaged"?

Please limit to cases where the executive branch has ignored supboenas.

 

The whole damn thing beginning to end from the "whistle blower/ rumor monger to lies about black mail to get Biden investigated. Which appear nowhere in the the transcript of the call.

 

Trump admitted the quid quo pro related to info on Biden.

What we have in the way of a transcript of the phone call indicates there was a quid pro quo.

Trump's Chief of Staff Mulvaney stated that there was a quid pro quo on Biden dirt.

Others in the administration claim there was a quid quo pro for an investigation on Biden.

Whistleblowers have stated that there was a quid pro quo.

Guilani has said there was a quid pro quo, and his actions make it clear as he was working with Russian Oligarch Firtash to trade the charges against him for dirt on Biden.

There is eviendce lying all over the place. And, the executive branch has shown nothing to dispute it.

Rick Perry resigned as energy secretary due to this crime.

Come on dude. This is NOT an open issue.

 

Not one damn thing right in the whole damn post.

 

As impossible as it is going to be for Repub senators not to vote to convict on the charge of obstructing the constitutional inquiry in to the Divider-in-Chief's impeachment..........since there are multiple examples of it as plain as day.............it will be equally diificult to rationalize a vote against the article charging Baby Donald with abusing his power in light of Sondland's admission.

Gordon Sondland Told Congress There Was Quid Pro Quo In Trump’s Ukraine Scheme
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/gordon-sondland-quid-pro-quo-ukraine-trump-testify

"Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland confirmed to House impeachment investigators during his testimony on October 17 that there was a quid pro quo in President Donald Trump’s dealings with Ukraine, according to Sondland’s lawyer.

The Wall Street Journal reported on Saturday night that the lawyer, Robert Luskin, had told the outlet his client had answered in the affirmative when a House member asked if Trump’s demand that Ukraine investigate 2020 Democratic candidate Joe Biden and Ukraine’s alleged election interference in 2016 in exchange for a White House meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky amounted to quid pro quo."

 

Democrats to Skip Court Fights Over Impeachment Witnesses
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/28/...tion=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage

WASHINGTON — House Democrats will forgo using the federal courts to try to compel testimony from recalcitrant witnesses in their impeachment inquiry, a top Democratic chairman said Monday, warning that lawmakers would instead use the lack of cooperation to bolster their case that President Trump has abused his office and obstructed Congress’s investigation.
.....................................................................................................................................................
There 2 read threws on this decision.

1. They already have enough evidence to impeach.

2. They want to put Senate Repubs in a box on the article of impeachment having to do with obstruction.

 

The inquiry is authorized yet more witnesses are refusing to comply with subpoenas. That puts Senate Repubs in a bind on the obstruction article of impeachment.