White House Issues Defiant Letter Refusing To Cooperate In Impeachment Proceedings

The White House continued along its ill-considered strategy of refusing to cooperate in an impeachment inquiry. I have previously written that Speaker Nancy Pelosi has made a fundamental error in not securing a vote of the House to commence an impeachment investigation. However, the letter issued by the White House counsel further undermines the case for executive privilege arguments and could reinforce obstruction allegations in any final articles of impeachment.

The letter rightfully raises concerns over the lack of a House vote of the body and the secrecy of proceedings. The Democrats have limited Republicans in their effort to question witnesses and secure material. However, that is not a legitimate basis for refusing to cooperate or supply clearly material evidence.

The letter emphasizes a lack of due process in the proceedings. The Constitution does not guarantee such rights as confrontation. Indeed, it does not expressly require anything other than a vote of the House on impeachment and a majority threshold for any referral of the matter to the Senate for trial.

Once again, past impeachments (like the one that I handled) have allowed for witness examinations and some adversarial process. That should be the case here. There is clearly an effort by Democrats to prevent serious questioning of witnesses by Republican members. That is not a good practice and undermines the impeachment investigation.

However, none of that justifies the position of the White House. This is a constitutional function of the highest order for Congress. There is a legitimate basis for congressional investigation under both its oversight and impeachment authority. If proven, these allegations of self-dealing could be a basis for articles of impeachment. A President cannot simply pick up his marbles and leave the game because he does not like the other players. A refusal to cooperate with a constitutionally mandated process can itself be an abuse of power.

Worse yet, the letter again undermines the executive privilege arguments that will be key to any court fight. I discussed yesterday how Trump’s tweet about wanting an ambassador to testify (but blocking him because he does not trust the committee) is the death knell for a privilege claim. A president cannot withhold material evidence because he does not like the other party in control of a house of Congress. It must be based on a claim that disclosure, even to a co-equal branch, would undermine national security or diplomatic relations or essential confidential communications. This letter repeats that flawed premise for refusing to cooperate. It is a curious move since tweets by Trump could be dismissed (as the Justice Department did in the immigration litigation) as not reflective of the real position of the government. Now, the White House counsel himself has embraced those same arguments.

The letter is another avoidable self-inflicted wound by a White House that seems intent on counter-punching itself into an impeachment. There are defenses here as well as viable privilege arguments. This letter however is eviscerating those defenses with a reckless abandon.

367 thoughts on “White House Issues Defiant Letter Refusing To Cooperate In Impeachment Proceedings”

  1. Completely off topic, but I know that many people on the blog enjoy nature.

    Yesterday we mourned the passing of preeminent macro photographer Andreas Kay. Kay had a brain tumor removed in Quito, and passed away less than a month later. He offered an unparalleled window deep into the natural world of Ecuador that many people would never glimpse. Ecuador teems with life. You could spend hours examining a square foot, and find layer after layer of organisms, all busy in the food web. There is cooperation, competition, and inter dependence. As someone who has spent some time in, and loved, Ecuador, he will be greatly missed.

    Andreas Kay left behind a legacy of photographs that is a treasure.

    https://ecomingafoundation.wordpress.com/tag/andreas-kay/

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/andreaskay/sets

  2. Turley seems to think that Trump is afraid of being impeached by the House. The same goes for the Dems and the lefties out there. It’s quite amusing.

    1. Trump’s fear should be public opinion and in a couple of ways. The first of course is if he survives impeachment but the facts surrounding his actions, which will be come well know to an extent they are not now, damage him irreparably for the election. The other is if it goes low enough that enough Republican senators feel they either can or must turn on him. Most of them would be more than happy to if they could get away with it and would be glad to be rid of him.

      1. “Most of them would be more than happy to if they could get away with it and would be glad to be rid of him.

        you hope so.

        you don’t know so.

        i doubt it. but, we will find out.

        1. Are you kidding? At least 1/2 of them hate his guts if not 75%. He’s a democrat with no principles who’s turned their party into a cult of personality, and he’s insulted a dozen of them.

          1. There is a difference between not liking him and not voting for him. Even the Never Trumper columnists are starting to defend Trump big time. The politicians are mostly mad at Trump because he is rocking the boat. That is how the Biden family got rich and if Trump had his way that would end for politicians on all sides of the aisle.

              1. “Over his long career in politics, Joseph R. Biden Jr. established his everyman bona fides by citing his status as the poorest member of the Senate and referring to himself as “Middle-Class Joe.” But in the first two years after leaving office, Mr. Biden substantially improved his financial fortunes, earning more than $15 million, according to tax returns his campaign released Tuesday.

                Thanks to six-figure speaking engagements and a lucrative deal to write a set of books, Mr. Biden and his wife, Jill, reported an adjusted gross income of about $11 million in 2017 and $4.6 million in 2018 — far more than any of his major Democratic primary opponents. Senator Kamala Harris of California and her husband reported the next-highest income, earning $3.4 million over those two years.

                On a separate financial disclosure report, also made public Tuesday, the Bidens reported current assets worth between $2.2 million and $8 million, up from the range of $303,000 to just over $1 million that he reported when his second term as vice president ended in January 2017….”

                https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/09/us/politics/joe-biden-net-worth.html

                1. Now look at the rest of Joe Biden’s family. From his brother to his son. They’ve all been cashing in big time on Joe’s political career.

                  1. Dear Trumpsters: You are talking about the Bidens, including Hunter, who was never elected to nor served in any governmental position, instead of the fat slob who broke the law by trying to leverage military aid to Ukraine to benefit his campaign because he is behind in the polls.

                    CONGRATULATIONS TO KELLYANNE! THE PIVOT WORKED! The dupes aren’t thinking about Trump and his unfitness for office or the crimes he committed, proof of which is actually recorded–they’re speculating about the Bidens, even though an investigation cleared them. Joe Biden hasn’t been in office for 3 years, but now, suddenly, because the polls say he could beat Trump, he needs to be investigated? The US Attorney General is traveling the globe, at taxpayer expense, to drum up some counter argument to the Mueller Report, but that doesn’t stink to you Trumpsters?

                    And, you don’t think that the Trumps are cashing in on his occupation of the White House? You don’t think that the fact that Trump has 2 hotels in Turkey has anything to do with pulling US aid to the Kurds? You don’t think that this maneuver, which Russia wanted, could even possibly be payback for Russia’s help in “winning the victory”? No, because Hannity keeps repeating the mantra: “no collusion….no obstruction”. And, you believe this?

                    1. “Dear Trumpsters: You are talking about the Bidens, including Hunter, who was never elected to nor served in any governmental position…”

                      Dear Nuttychacha: We are talking about the Bidens, including Hunter, BECAUSE Joe Biden is running for president!

                      And ol’ Joe has yet to sit down and answer questions. Instead, he gets flustered and says “there’s never been any indication of conflicts of interest, ever!”….say whaaat Joe?

                      On its face, what Hunter Biden did is corruption. He was for sale. He sold his dad’s name for a LOT of money just to sit on a board doing nothing but lending his name. Just the Biden name being part of management of a very corrupt company in a very corrupt country, was enough to keep any investigators away. That’s called corruption. That’s called a lot of things. But Joe Biden thinks he should NOT have to answer any questions? Think again Joe.

                    2. It is absolutely common practice in all levels of business for those with the right name to sell it to willing buyers. There is nothing illegal or inherently corrupt about that practice as businesses find it valuable to have those names associated with them. This works from retail advertising to law firms. If you can find the name somehow used illegally you’ve got something, but no one has cited one thing Biden did that was illegal . In fact no one has cited anything he did, probably because he didn’t have to do anything.

                      If you’ve got something, say it. Otherwise your being a fool spouting empty nonsense your handlers fed you.

                    3. Anonymous stupidly gives up the pretense that Trump was interested in corruption and not the election. Of course we all know this was about the election, though the Trumpsters have to pretend they Trump was playing Eliot Ness.

                2. Anon1 — this is reply to your 4:12pm comment below where you wrote: “It is absolutely common practice in all levels of business for those with the right name to sell it to willing buyers. There is nothing illegal or inherently corrupt about that practice as businesses find it valuable to have those names associated with them. This works from retail advertising to law firms.”

                  So Anon1, is it “absolutely common practice” to sell the family name of a sitting vice president of the United States to a corrupt foreign business in a corrupt foreign country where daddy had just initiated a coup and regime change?

                  Thoughts?

                  1. For perspective, that would be like Don Jr. getting paid $50k a month to sit on the board of an oil company in Venzuela. Right now. While daddy is in office steering foreign policy. Or if Pence’s kid did that, right now, while daddy is in office. Is that “absolutely common practice” in your book. No big deal, standard practice, nothing to question??

                    Of course not.

                    1. You have no idea what Don, jr, Ivanka, Eric, and Daddy are doing and don’t want to know.

                  2. Uh, since there are at present 5 ex-VPs alive and only one sitting VP, nothing their progeny do can be deemed “common practice”.

                    As to your specifics, Biden did not initiate a coup and regime change in the Ukraine, though he did manage the interests of the entire West, including the IMF, EU, and the US through their official policy to clamp down on that corruption in the interests of promised loans and grants.

                    1. “though Biden did manage…official US policy to clamp down on corruption…” while his son is being paid truckloads of money to lend his daddy’s name to a corrupt company in that very same coutry daddy is point man for to “clamping down on corruption.” Try again Anon1.

                3. Hey Anon1, maybe you would understand what I’m saying better if I simply speak to you in your own language? So let’s try this reply b/c it’s one of your favorite acronyms: “GFY.”

              2. “Biden got rich on speaking fees”

                You are absolutely correct. The Biden family got rich on speaking to the Ukranian and Chinese governments while selling the US down the drain. The family also got some money from speaking fees just like the Clintons where there was a quid pro quo. But the Clinton’s had a foundation that dried up as soon as it appeared she would have no power in the US government.

            1. Some of the NeverTrumpers (or quondam NeverTrumpers) are taking it issue by issue. AFAIK, Max Boot, Wm. Kristol, David French, Jonah Goldberg, Stephen Hayes, Jennifer Rubin, George Will, Mona Charen, David Frum, David Brooks, and Patrick Frey remain unreconciled. In the hands of someone like Rod Dreher and Ross Douthat, issue-by-issue can look pretty unimpressive. Note that the majority of these individuals have liberal patrons as we speak.

              1. Now how could I forget Conor Friedersdorf and Matt K Lewis? (Maybe because both of them were shill’s pre-Trump?).

                1. I already disliked Geo Will long before Trump. These other guys are weasels, I never liked them from their start.

                  Dreher and Douthat, I will read them, sometimes. The other ones, I won’t even bother to read the byline. I tune out.

                  A lot of this is going to proceed down tribal lines.

              2. DSS, I can’t remember the list of Never Trumpers that are now supporting Trump and his reelection. That doesn’t mean there aren’t policy differences. I have policy differences with Trump as well but I stand totally behind him.

                Your list contains some people I never liked and never trusted. Top on the list William Kristol. Jonah Goldberg is someone who I used to like and read his books even mentioning some of what he wrote on this blog. However, after he and a number of others became a Never Trumpers at National Review I became a Never National Review and still get calls on a regular basis from National Review.

                I hate to provide lists of who is or who isn’t a former Never Trumper because I can’t be sure. I am not even sure if your list of today’s Never Trumper’s is accurate. Some that I consider important and that have changed their views whose names have appeared on this blog I believe to be Erick Erickson, Victor Davis Hanson, and Andrew McCarthy. Shucks Lindsay Graham stands up for the President most of the time and he was a major detractor. I think by election time we will see most of the significant people that were considered Never Trumpers lined up in his corner.

          2. So you’re saying Trump plays the game just like the Democrats do…and if only he had run as a Democrat instead of Republican they could have gotten behind him and worked with him? Of course.

          3. Launching an impeachment on a wing and a prayer isn’t a wise move(as you know, I’m hoping the Dems impeach). Look at yourself and your fellow lefties- you have been dying to impeach Trump since before he was inaugurated and then you conducted an absurd three year investigation into whether Trump was a traitor. And, suddenly, overnight you’re onto another accusation and ready for impeachment. The left isn’t thinking straight…just like all those calls for using the 25th amendment which was comical/treasonous.

            Those are my words, but they might as well be Ted Cruz’s words. One of those angry Republicans you’re counting on. So listen to Ted and understand why the Dems get crushed in a Senate trial:

            1. If Trump retired I could get behind Cruz. I thought he was just another Republican fraud before, but the past 3 years he has been a stand up guy. I almost like him now. He won’ t crack.

              1. Kurtz, I think Cruz has demonstrated his abilities and intellect that he could be a good President. However, there is or was something in his overall appearance that seemed to turn some people off. What it is I do not know.

                1. I noticed a certain asymmetry in the left side of his face when he smirks or smiles or grimaces.

                  however, he’s got nice hair and is not really any fatter than the average white guy in a suit his age. he’s probably on the handsome side of average. politicians tend to be slightly more handsome than the average person, in general, he’s not standout in that either way

                  the beard is ok but it kind of brings out that asymmetry which shows up in his face when he smiles. i think he is going with the beard because he has a weak chin. it cancels that out and makes his nose less pointy, but, then the asymmetry in his smiles and smirks is more noticeable

            2. The evidence is clear and compelling, which is why none of you, the GOP politicians, or Trump want to talk about it. In fact the GOP politicians are all still hiding out if you haven’t noticed. That’s not a wing and a prayer.

              Yeah, I’m sure Ted Cruz is cool with Trump calling his father an assassin and his wife a dog. No hard feelings at all!

              1. nah, the socalled evidence stinks. no quid pro quo, you just are inferring one. your inference, and the CIA snitch snooping on trump, and his coup plotting, john brennan sycophant cia lawyers, and all the winks and nods from the talking heads on tv you can find. No, their inferences are not enough to justify the massively significant move of impeachment. but give it a whirl! see how it goes for ya

                for my inferences, im inferring the CIA is a rogue agency which can’t discipline it’s insubordinate agents. i have a better pile of evidence than you do for your supposed quid pro quo.

                1. kurtz, no offense, but only a f….g idiot would read the State Dept texts, the WH memo, and GOP Senator and Trump loyalist Ron Johnson’s comment on what the EU Ambassador told him and somehow think there was no QPQ. You’re not an idiot which leads me to believe you haven’t read all this, and guess what? Adam Schiff and the CIA had nothing to do with any of it except the uncovering..

                  Do it and come back here and say that.

                    1. kurtz, the evidence is not some minor goose chase. If you care about this you should be up to speed.

                    2. tell ya what. i’ m waiting for articles of impeachment to be voted. until then it’s all talk.

                      I’ll read it all then. if your glorious leaders get to it.

              2. The evidence is clear and compelling,

                Again, you’re looking inside yourself and nowhere else.

          4. they’re all Democrats in drag too. so what. I still like a lot of Democrats, anyways. The Republican party has eroded since Reagan commanded the respect of the common man to the point it was a bunch of losers letting the neocons steer the foreign policy boat and ot much else. I had come to loathe Republican functionaries intensely prior to Trump.

            they turn on Trump, they will have nobody left backing them but the Kroch brothers or such like. they can put their hand out to Soros. I’m sure Soros would be happy to bribe them too.

            Republican party will march lockstep with Trump and the deplorables or it will face pitchforks, too.

          5. The psychos like anon1 and Natacha who “hate his guts” aren’t representative of “1/2” or “75%’ of the population.

  3. Trump’s Pretentious Concern For Biden’s ‘Corruption’..

    Belies Administration’s Record Of Gutting Anti-Corruption Policies

    President Trump says his request for Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden was driven by his concerns about corruption.

    “This is not about politics, this is about corruption,” Trump said last week. “If you look and you read our Constitution and many other things, I have an obligation to look at corruption.”

    But anti-corruption advocates say his administration’s record of fighting corruption is weak and not in line with Trump’s rhetoric.

    One of Trump’s very first actions as president was to sign a law that rescinded a Securities and Exchange Commission regulation that would have required oil and gas companies listed on U.S. stock exchanges to disclose any payments they made to governments around the world. Supporters of the regulation say it was aimed at deterring bribery.

    Oil companies and Republican critics said the rule would have placed undue burdens on small businesses and hurt American jobs.

    After that rule was rescinded, the Trump administration then pulled the U.S. out of an international effort to set a global standard for transparent management of oil and gas resources known as the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI).

    While Trump has complained about corruption in Ukraine, the country is a member of EITI, which the group says has made meaningful progress toward meeting its transparency standards.

    It’s not just Trump’s policy decisions that have worried some experts who work on corruption issues.

    The blurring of boundaries between Trump’s official duties and his personal financial dealings has weakened U.S. standing on corruption, said Andy Spalding, a University of Richmond professor who specializes in international anti-corruption law.

    “The president’s willingness to do this, plus the United States public’s willingness to tolerate this, is the greatest harm that’s coming out of this administration,” Spalding said. “That’s the loudest and clearest signal that we’re sending to the world right now.”

    Edited from: “Trump’s Says He’s Concerned About Corruption, But Advocates Say His Record Is Weak”

    Today’s NPR

    1. Regarding Above: Trump’s steadfast refusal to show his tax returns and his refusal to cooperate in any way with the impeachment inquiry makes a mockery of his alleged concern for Biden’s ‘corruption’.

      1. Regarding the above, Peter caught Olly’s cut about being the paper boy and is instead recycling National Pretend Radio.

    2. key thing you missed: “advocates say”

      that word advocate means a biased person in favor of the opposition

  4. I’m guessing that Mrs. Pelosi jumped the gun in announcing “impeachment inquiry” based on insider misinformation spoon-fed to her by the highly ideological Adam Schiff. Nancy puts Party over everything else…country, Constitution.

  5. Anon’s no involvement theory and no proof arguments re Ukraine: FALSE

    Hannity’s opinion made a long time ago: TRUE

    Hunter Biden was on the board of Burisma.

    “The U.S. government had open-source intelligence and was aware as early as February of 2019 that the Ukrainian government was planning to reopen the Burisma investigation,This is long before the president ever imagined having a call with President Zelensky”

    Note, Hunter Biden was on the board of Burisma during this time period.

    “That is a significant change in the timeline — it was omitted from the whistleblower’s complaint, and the question is did he not know it or did he exclude it because it didn’t fit the narrative he was trying to write,”

    The size of the money was higher than Joe Biden said.

    https://video.foxnews.com/v/6093306080001/#sp=show-clips

  6. Turley would have made an excellent US Catholic Bishop: fickle, angst, preachy, prissy, talks out of both sides of his mitre mouth, head in the clouds of rubrics and texts but exponentially detached from reality.

    The Dems have never played by the rules (LBJ, Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton, Harry Reid, Hillary, MSM et al). Pelosi forgets that Trump commands attention as Hillary learned. He will upstage the sycophant liberal media, hence his Twitter feed. He will ignore Pelosi’s dictatorship, he will run this through the US Courts as he has done as a businessman for decades, and in the process Americans will be educated about what really is happening: coup d’etat.

    Trump knows exactly what he is doing and Pelosi thinks she can do to him what she and her ilk have done to previous Republicans. It’s a whole new playing field and Trump plays nasty as heck, nastier than Hillary. This should be fun to watch, particularly as Pelosi will be known as the last Democrat leader in the US since we all know this is the end of the Democrat Party. Like the Civil War, the Dems will push for cessation of the Union. But will Mexico take them?

    developing indeed

    🍿

      1. my husband and I adopted and raised a son and we were saddened to see him not turn out well. We would have done anything for him to be a productive, honorable, successful husband and father like Estovir seems to be, though he never talks about his children. Our son got caught up in homosexuality, drugs, political activism and almost died of a heart attack. We pray for him daily but wish he had turned out better

        Dorothea and Raymond Brock

        1. 😀

          Dorothea, you tried your best and provided a child with a good home who otherwise would have had no parents. His habits are despicable but what is worrisome is that so many Democrats follow him around despite his lies. They repeat what he says since their ideology has become a faith based religion of where David appears to be one of the Ministers.

  7. I could agree with the Professor if this was truly a House action. This is an investigation by decree in an attempt to rush things through to an Impeachment vote before the election season starts.
    What JT seems to be saying is that if a citizen is picked up by the police and asks for legal representation, that mere act is obstructing the investigation.
    If they do not want to give the President grounds to call their inquiry bogus, remove the grounds. Take a vote of the full House.

      1. Paul C Schulte…….OT: “Sharpiegate” comments are now 1,082.

        I think we’re gonna need a bigger boat. 🛶

        1. “Paul C Schulte…….OT: “Sharpiegate” comments are now 1,082.
          I think we’re gonna need a bigger boat. 🛶”

          Cindy, it’s an Anonymous boat so it can be bigger or smaller.

            1. LOL, Cindy.

              I love ‘(hot) air boat’. That is what it became so much so that the hot air lifted the numbers to new heights. (hot air rises)

  8. It is political theater as Schiff proved with his reading of his fictional transcript. Trump is right to thumb his nose at it until they vote on it.

    1. Schiff did not produce a “fictional transcript”. He paraphrased/parodied Trump’s comments to mock him and emphasize his intentions, but announced that was what he was doing as he did it. None of that is dishonest or blameworthy unless you disagree with the parody..

        1. Oh, he actually does own a building business (or he’s appropriated the identity of a man in Gainesville who owns a building business; wouldn’t surprise me if it’s one of that man’s grandchildren making use of his voice). The hooey is the ‘I’m-from-the-Deep-South” shtick.

  9. Though we appear to have an independent Congress and independent Judiciary supposedly insulated from politics, Professor Turley fails to recognize that we also have an independent Presidency. Is Turley turning a blind eye to the politics being played in front of us that endangers our Republic?

    “another avoidable self-inflicted wound by a White House that seems intent on counter-punching itself into an impeachment.”

    In other words when a group of people attack an individual on a dark street attempting to kill him that individual shouldn’t fight back because he might be accused of throwing a punch at one of his attackers. There is such a thing as due process or the right to defend oneself. Turley seems to hide those rights somewhere where it can’t be seen.

    1. Maybe too many people forget what Trump has learned over the years as a private entrepreneur. Government has tried to intimidate groups of people over the years to get those groups to do government’s bidding where government should not have been involved. As an outspoken citizen and prominent the government has used all its force to go after Trump to intimidate others in his field of business. Government spent years and countless dollars doing this but in the end Trump prevailed. Most people cave but not Trump and from those experiences he has learned far more than most attornies have ever reckoned with.

      Most of our Congressmen haven’t worked very long in the private sector and their manhood is near non-existent so they think they can make him cave because that is what they would do. They are wrong and in the end Trump will prove it.

      1. i can say that at many times over my humble and mostly unimpressive career, i have learned from various businesspeople i have served, perhaps, more than they learned from me. I would have been blessed to have a client with the acumen of Trump. if I diid however then no time to chat with you wonderful folks. so its ok!

        1. Lil Richie Rich is a self promoting grifter and TV personality who was given a fortune which we have no idea he’s maintained or frittered away and he doesn’t want us to know. He’s the self described king of debt who in the early 90’s lost more money in one year then any other US taxpayer and has filed for bankruptcy 4 times.

          What exactly do you think you would learn from him? Planning on a big inheritance soon?

          1. Trump was a real estate developer and hotelier before he was a tv guy

            we’re all learning a lot from him if we’re paying attention

            Im always open to new lessons from unexpected sources. maybe that’s why i keep on talking to you? maybe you will give me some insights i can use.

  10. Cet animal est très méchant,
    Quand on l’attaque il se défend.

    “This animal is very bad; when you attack it, it defends itself.”

    The Pinkos are both outraged and shocked when Trump defends himself against the rolling coup.

    When you are dealing with a partisan, immoral and mendacious mob like the MSM and the dems, you are entitled to used whatever means necessary to defend yourself.

    The dems threw the rule book out the window when they started the coup.

    1. Monument, Pelosi was trying to stay away from impeachment – the records clear – for political reasons but something about a president using the powers of his office, including finalizing military assistance approved by Congress, to get a foreign government to help his political campaign get dirt on an opponent just wouldn’t go down. Maybe you’re OK with that being SOP in the future, but Pelosi’s hand was forced. It’s OK, it was probably inevitable eventually given the dickwad in the WH, but this was not planned by the Democrats.

      1. “…but this was not planned by the Democrats.”

        Yes, it was planned. Starting on November 8, 2018. Jerry Nadler was overheard talking about their “plan” on an Amtrak train.

      2. Rep. Jerrold Nadler from New York was overheard talking about investigating and impeaching both President Donald Trump and U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Brian Kavanaugh on phone calls during a train ride from New York to Washington Wednesday.

        A reporter overheard the House Judiciary Committee’s top Democrat talk about several topics that included the Democrats’ post-election strategy, investigating and impeaching Trump and Kavanaugh, and concerns about how a strong economy could cause trouble for Democrats in the future according to The Federalist.

        Nadler, who will likely chair the House Judiciary Committee in 2019, was overheard talking loudly on an Acela train as he was heading to Washington DC for a two-day planning session with his staff and Judiciary Committee staff.

        “We’ve got to figure out what we’re doing,” Nadler said as he discussed routes for investigating new Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh, including one involving the FBI. “They didn’t even do a half-ass job,” Nadler said, adding, “They didn’t interview 30 witnesses who said ‘Interview me! I’ve got a lot to say!’”

        cont’d….

        https://hillreporter.com/top-house-democrat-heard-talking-about-impeaching-trump-and-kavanaugh-13517

        1. they want to attack Kav too in order to knock him down as a potential vote if something goes before court.

          they’re ambitious but they will also pay ambition’s debt before the final act. I suspect

      3. Nancy Pelosi helped her son, Paul Pelosi, Jr. to ‘cash in’ on lucrative business deals in Ukraine, like Hunter Biden and other children and family members of the politcal class. And this is just Ukraine. Let’s have a look at China next.

        October 4, 2019

        “House Speaker Nancy Pelosi may soon be facing similar allegations to Joe Biden. A recent report suggested Pelosi’s son Paul may have used her position to benefit financially. A promotional video from 2013 resurfaced on Thursday, brought to public attention by journalist Patrick Howley.

        The video shows Nancy Pelosi speaking about her efforts in office to push for clean energy. Her message is followed by a promotional statement from her son Paul, who was a board member of Viscoil and an executive at its related company NRGLab….”

        https://www.oann.com/son-of-house-speaker-pelosi-made-money-in-ukraine-used-her-in-ads/

          1. You should be. None of the Trump progeny have done anything like what Biden’s kid did.

            Joe Biden was called out by the NYT editorial board for his son’s association with one of the most corrupt oligarch’s in one of the most corrupt countries in the world — after “dad,” the US vice president, initiated regime change in that same country. The whole thing stinks and the Democrats are trying to deflect by attacking Trump.

            Ukraine had more influence in the 2016 election, to the benefit of Hillary Clinton, than anything Russia did. Yet the media has little interest in investigating or discussing any of this. Why? Because it hurts Democrats.

            Biden is running for president and the media is not holding him to account for any of this. Why not?

            1. You know that’s BS, right?

              “WASHINGTON — President Trump was repeatedly warned by his own staff that the Ukraine conspiracy theory that he and his lawyer were pursuing was “completely debunked” long before the president pressed Ukraine this summer to investigate his Democratic rivals, a former top adviser said on Sunday.

              Thomas P. Bossert, who served as Mr. Trump’s first homeland security adviser, said he told the president there was no basis to the theory that Ukraine, not Russia, intervened in the 2016 election and did so on behalf of the Democrats. Speaking out for the first time, Mr. Bossert said he was “deeply disturbed” that Mr. Trump nonetheless tried to get Ukraine’s president to produce damaging information about Democrats….”

              https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/29/us/politics/tom-bossert-trump-ukraine.html

              “Bidens in Ukraine: An Explainer
              Former vice president led anticorruption efforts in country; his son served on board of Ukraine firm
              By Alan Cullison
              Sept. 22, 2019 6:03 pm ET

              KIEV, Ukraine—Joe Biden’s involvement with Ukraine and his son’s work in the country, which President Trump has repeatedly said should be investigated, began when the former vice president was serving as the Obama administration’s point man on relations with Ukraine and rooting out bureaucratic corruption….”

              https://www.wsj.com/articles/bidens-anticorruption-effort-in-ukraine-overlapped-with-sons-work-in-country-11569189782

              1. “The U.S. government had open-source intelligence and was aware as early as February of 2019 that the Ukrainian government was planning to reopen the Burisma investigation,This is long before the president ever imagined having a call with President Zelensky”

                Note, Hunter Biden was on the board of Burisma during this time period.

                “That is a significant change in the timeline — it was omitted from the whistleblower’s complaint, and the question is did he not know it or did he exclude it because it didn’t fit the narrative he was trying to write,”

                Additionally Joe Biden’s statement of $50,000 was erroneous. Investigations demonstrate the payoffs to be much higher.

                https://video.foxnews.com/v/6093306080001/#sp=show-clips

      4. Anon – Pelosi was trying to stay away from impeachment by having an impeachment without a vote? I guess that means that she doubted she either had the votes, the impeachment would be successful, or that the process would harm Democrats. Instead, she wanted to try to get opposition research with an “impeachment inquiry” without actually following the law and getting the vote.

        It must be so easy to work for the Democrat research department. They don’t have to do anything. People are soliciting activists in the intelligence community to abuse their access to dig up dirt on Trump, the media tries to dig up dirt on Trump, 12 attempts at impeachment investigations have tried to dig up dirt on Trump, and now Pelosi is trying to subpoena everyone she can to try to dig up dirt on Trump without a vote.

        You know? Maybe one day Republicans will figure that what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. They will simply delete emails. Have private servers. Smash their phones and blackberries while under subpoena. And the next time a Democrat is elected, they will employ activists in all levels of government, and the intelligence community, to constantly harass, stalk, look for dirt, obstruct, and undermine, not giving a damn as to how this weakens the country in the global arena, if it strengthens Russia, Iran, North Korea, and China’s world position, or if it makes us more vulnerable to terrorists. They’ll employ cancel culture, and threaten to riot every time a Leftist is invited to speak anywhere. They will plant themselves in audiences and scream and shout down Leftist speakers. They will comb through every social media post ever written, at any age, and try to ruin every Leftist’s life and accomplishments, because it is impossible to grow into a better person, apparently. They will engage in voter fraud, while fighting any efforts to curb voter fraud. They will require safe spaces free from Leftists on campuses and in business. And they will threaten, harass, and attack anyone with any Democrat clothing or bumper sticker. They will block the streets, chase down, and drag out of cars anyone with a Democrat bumper sticker. They will do end runs around the Electoral College to benefit Republicans. They will unfriend Leftist friends, disinvite them from Thanksgiving, and insult them.

        What would the country be like if Republicans behaved the way that Democrats do? As it stands, too many Democrats behave badly, assuming that Republicans will keep taking the high road. I wonder how long that will last? I mean, if the way that Democrats act is the way that the world is going to be, then shouldn’t everyone play by the same rules? Does civilized behavior only apply to half of America? If the civilized keep getting punished, then at some point, the incentive to behave diminishes. That would be a sad day for society.

        1. No, Pelosi was trying to stay away from impeachment before the Ukrainian incident to protect her vulnerable seats.. That incident left her no choice.

        2. “What would the country be like if Republicans behaved the way that Democrats do?”

          PROBABLY A BETTER PLACE. DEMOCRATS ARE MORE AGGRESSIVE AND MORE AGGRESSION OFTEN BRINGS MORE POWER.

          “As it stands, too many Democrats behave badly, assuming that Republicans will keep taking the high road. I wonder how long that will last?

          HOPEFULLY IT WILL NOT LAST. TRUMP IS SHOWING THE WILL TO MAKE A CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS OUT OF THIS, WHICH IS TO SAY, A TEST OF ONE BRANCH VERSUS ANOTHER. THE ARC OF HISTORY FAVORS EXECUTIVES IN SUCH CONFLICTS, SO IT FAVORS HIM

          I urge Trump to avoid mass arrests and incarceration of the coup plotters. The safer thing for our nation, than arresting them for treason, is to let the political process of impeachment and the election play out, and the voters to have the last say. that will be safer for America in the long run, than crushing the head of this snake with force. better to use guile.

          But anything much beyond that, Trump can take the gloves off for all I care, indeed I welcome it

      5. the squad and other pantsuit mafia forced her hand not trump’s thing

        they threw biden under the bus. this will become more and more clear as time goes by

          1. well maybe you’re right. Maybe the CIA schemers are making her do it. I have no idea how powerful the rogues really are, I just guess at it, based on the obvious

        1. Kurtz, when it happens Anon will never admit he was wrong. He will simply move on and claim all sorts of things that aren’t true about his past beliefs while he tries to shift the discussion to something else or ignores accepted facts. After all, since Anon / Jan F. have been on the blog that is what he has done.

  11. “The Constitution does not guarantee such rights as confrontation. Indeed, it does not expressly require anything other than a vote of the House on impeachment and a majority threshold for any referral of the matter to the Senate for trial.”
    ************************
    Luckily the SCOTUS does require due process in Congressional hearings:

    Quinn v. U.S., 349 US 155 (1955)
    Watkins v. US, 354 US 178 (1957)
    Sinclair v. US, 276 US 263 (1929)

    and from the DC District Court there’s this dealking specifically with impeachment of a federal judge:

    Hastings v. US, 802 F. Supp. 490 (DCDC 1992) vacated on other grounds by DC Circuit.

    1. If the argument is that due process applies in House impeachment proceedings, the cases cited hardly advance the claim. Three of the four citations appear in Cipollone’s letter to Congress. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/PAC-Letter-10.08.2019.pdf?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=wh The fourth, Sinclair, does not — perhaps because it concerns an unsuccessful challenge to a Massachusetts inheritance tax and has nothing to do with impeachment or Congress. Watkins and Quinn concern Fifth Amendment challenges to contempt of Congress convictions arising from hearings before the House Un-American Activities Committee. Application of the right against self-incrimination is not disputed in the current impeachment proceedings.

      Hastings involved a due process challenge to the impeachment of a judge, but the the claim alleged that the right was denied in the Senate trial, not during House proceedings. The Hastings court concluded that the Senate trial proceedings should have afforded the judge a panoply of trial rights and a trial before the full Senate, not just a Senate Committee.

  12. So…have a vote then. Get it over with. Yes, the Dems are being sneaky and dishonest by NOT having a vote.
    Doesn’t surprise me in the least. But ANY impeachment based on an anonymous whistleblower will be invalid in my mind. No anonymous sources. No hidden testimony. Everything out in the open for me and all other American citizens to see.

  13. Trump loves this stuff. He thrives on it. Notice how he is perhaps the first president to actually look younger after 3 years in office?

  14. There is no planned strategy here, just Trump impulsively reacting to being cornered, specifically on the EU ambassador testifying yesterday. The evidence is growing and dovetailing and he knows it and he doesn’t care what he wrecks to save his own sorry ass. No matter how it ends, he will not walk out of the WH on his own, and that is a very troubling thought.

      1. Barney Fife could bring this one home. The evidence is clear enough.

        I understand the desire of Trump fans to pretend this is some a mano y mano contest lacking any content and they studiously avoid facing the content or pretend it’s hearsay from discredited – in their world – sources. They will be rudely awakened eventually.

        1. The evidence is clear enough.

          You keep uttering this incantation, as if it can conjure a case out of the ether. It doesn’t work that way.

            1. The newspapers you read are pulling your leg. You keep telling me ‘collusion has been proved’ by the gang who spent 32 months investigating and secured not one indictment for conspiracy of any kind, except for a bunch of Russian internet trolls who bought Fakebook ads, cases they knew they’d never have to try. There’s a lesson in there somewhere, just one you’re determined not to learn.

              1. Absurd XIV, you might do well to read a newspaper, as Anon suggested. Yesterday the Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee, headed by Richard Burr of North Carolina, issued a report confirming that it was indeed the Russians who interfered in the 206 election. Said report essentially confirmed all the finding of The Mueller Report.

                1. that it was indeed the Russians who interfered in the 206 election.

                  I’m sure the Facebook ads and mock rallies were decisive.

        2. the content is political, and it will proceed according to political means

          this is what the Congress having the sole impeachment power means in reality: if they seek to do it unfairly with no procedure and a kangaroo court style proceeding, then it plays directly into the hands of the accused in the election, who will have the sympathy not only of his natural base but also increasingly of all people who have ever been bullied by angry politicians, or hammered in unfair proceedings

          for a country that locks up more people than any other, that is a lot of people here

        3. ok we will see. Barney Fife and what army i might ask? an army of pantsuits wearing, screeching harridans and their milquetoast lackeys? an army of bureaucratic rogue schemers from CIA?

          those are daunting foes but I think that barney fife will need something with more starch in its sails than that

          as the stakes go up, fortune favors the brave.

    1. very good

      “Good morning kids. Midweek, and a blessed Yom Kippur to our Jewish friends. In the lead this morning is the GOP, with notable exceptions, finally standing behind the President, who essentially told Schiff-for-Brains, Palsi Pelosi and the rest of the filthy, thieving traitors in the Democrat-Left-Media Complex to take their phony-baloney kabuki-buk—- “impeachment” scam and shove it. Of course, the latter still think they are soooper-gee-nee-us in cornering the President into committing obstruction of justice, but this too will blow up in their faces like the patented Loony Toons trick cigar with the stick of TNT in it. I mean, they’re moving ahead with their grand strategery as if the President did what they expected them to do and not release the transcript of the phone call with Ukraine president Zelensky. So with the “whistleblower” blown, what did they do? Got a second “whistleblower” who allegedly was the horse’s mouth that the first “whistleblower” heard the hearsay from. And even this individual (if he/she really exists) did not actually hear the call either. Again, it’s totally irrelevant since the transcript has been released….

      The whole thing is a complete sham. Subpoenaing individuals, for the purposes of “impeachment” is illegal and unconstitutional since there has yet to be a floor vote in the House to officially move the process forward. The Democrats are banking on the American people not knowing this, but I can guarantee you that this President, like he has done every d— day since he came down that escalator at Trump Tower is going to give them an education. The Dem strategy now is to continue the sham as long as possible and attempt to peel away a few squish RINOs in the House and perhaps Mittelschmerz and Collins in the Senate so they can claim “bipartisanship!” I don’t think even that is going to fly. Cocaine Mitch has flat out slammed the Dems for this banana republic bull—-. Good for him.

      The Democrats once again screwed themselves over by completely refusing to understand Trump, expecting Trump to play by their rules like every other Republican or conservative that they took down in the past. Again, the only person that can defeat Trump is Trump himself. The more he sees what DC and the Left are all about, the more he learns, and crucially, the harder he fights back.”

      HAIL TRUMP

  15. No fabricated evidence, the bloated fascist gave it himself on national TV. There is great concern that should the whistleblowers testify before the committees the repugthuglicans will out them and that is a very legitimate concern. As the professor says, there is no requirement for the House to vote first. Impeach, imprison, keep GitMo open for the entire Trump crime family and their enablers.

      1. Off subject and I’ve only been back to Pattaya once in the last 5 yrs. I brought my companionship of many years and was visiting an old friend from England that had recovered from cancer. You ever been? Naw, didn’t think so. You wouldn’t have the stamina…lol. Besides, the glory days are over.

        What’s the matter, can’t find any other way to attack?

        Like I said, keep GitMo open for the entire Trump crime family and their enablers.

  16. Since the courts have taken notice of the President’s tweets, they certainly can take notice of the calumny of Adam Schiff. The Democrats are not going into this in good faith and the courts may recognize that. I think the President is willing to litigate it all.

  17. Yes, Jon, but the House are Gleefully proceeding *without a vote* and clearly fabricated evidence. The whole thing stinks. Sometimes I can’t decide if you are being obtuse or truly simply are that impartial.

    1. I agree. Usually love his commentary but why cooperate with an unfair biased obviously rigged scam of an “investigation”

Leave a Reply