Hillary Clinton: Mueller documented a serious crime against all Americans. Here's how to respond.

[japple]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hillary-clinton-mueller-documented-a-serious-crime-against-all-americans-heres-how-to-respond/2019/04/24/1e8f7e16-66b7-11e9-82ba-fcfeff232e8f_story.html?utm_term=.5b37bef02fb8

The debate about how to respond to Russia’s “sweeping and systemic” attack — and how to hold President Trump accountable for obstructing the investigation and possibly breaking the law — has been reduced to a false choice: immediate impeachment or nothing. History suggests there’s a better way to think about the choices ahead.

Obviously, this is personal for me, and some may say that I’m not the right messenger. But my perspective is not just that of a former candidate and target of the Russian plot. I am also a former senator and secretary of state who served during much of Vladi­mir Putin’s ascent, sat across the table from him and knows firsthand that he seeks to weaken our country.

We have to get this right. The Mueller report isn’t just a reckoning about our recent history; it’s a warning about the future. Unless checked, the Russians will interfere again in 2020, and possibly other adversaries, such as China or North Korea, will as well. This is an urgent threat. Nobody but Americans should be able to decide America’s future. And, unless he’s held accountable, the president may show even more disregard for the laws of the land and the obligations of his office. He will likely redouble his efforts to advance Putin’s agenda, including rolling back sanctions, weakening NATO and undermining the European Union.

Of all the lessons from our history, the one that’s most important may be that each of us has a vital role to play as citizens. A crime was committed against all Americans, and all Americans should demand action and accountability. Our founders envisioned the danger we face today and designed a system to meet it. Now it’s up to us to prove the wisdom of our Constitution, the resilience of our democracy and the strength of our nation.

[orangecrush]

1. We owe Hillary

A huge debt of gratitude.

[True Dough]

2. Quite a coup for the WaPo to score an op-ed from Hillary

It's a measured reaction that she's advocating. We'd be wise to follow her advice.

As an aside, the third most liked comment is from someone going by the username "windmill cancer survivor." I chuckled.

[japple]

3. Thank you. I think her opinion piece is excellent and, I agree with your

assessment that "we would be wise to follow her advice."

[llmart]

7. We would be wise to follow her advise because she's our President.

[malaise]

22. The most important response to date

She will eat him alive

[comradebillyboy]

29. I doubt if the NY Times would have published it. Mo Dowd will probably

attack Hillary over it tomorrow and maybe Maga Haberman will as well.

[gldstwmn]

4. If anyone had ever told me that Donald

effing Trump would be making a run at our Constitution I would have fallen down laughing. What a nightmare. Great op ed by Hillary. Windmill cancer survivor is a hilarious username.

[Generic Other]

5. If ever

there was a case against this fake president, Hillary Clinton and everyone who voted for her should be named as plaintiffs right next to the government of the United States.

[ismnotwasm]

6. I still love that woman

Wisdom

[Andy823]

8. Kick to the top.

This needs to be kept at the top of the page.

[DoBotherMe]

9. kick

[marieo1]

10. A true statesman

She knows first hand who Vladimir Putin is, better than anyone in the USA today!! She knows how he thinks and what he's up to. We really missed the boat by not fighting for her to be our President. She is a brilliant statesman and a true patriot of America. I trust her and her opinions and I know Barack Obama does, too. DJT doesn't even know the meaning of the word 'statesman', nor does he know how to be one and doesn't even want to be one. The only reason he wanted to be president is what he would gain financially. The R's that support DJT are just like him with the same lack of values!!

[BigmanPigman]

19. You said it!

I listen to her more than any other person's opinion at this point. She is my barometer and I will follow her.

RESIST!

[Takket]

11. "Now it's up to us to prove the wisdom of our Constitution" YUP

[Volaris]

12. Goddamn can that woman throw shade when she wants to hahahaha...

..and knows how to do it with such subtlety that most won't even see it.

In a former life, I bet she was a Ninja Assassin.
In an alternate universe, she's probably some version of Batman lol...

[Evolve Dammit]

13. Well said H. Problem is the discussion is not happening in Congress. Specifically, where are

the necessary detailed investigations into documented cases of Russian hacking, voting machine vulnerability (hacking) and uniform replacement (with paper trail), etc. in all 50 states. This should have been done after the 2000 debacle. It seems the Congress suffers from ADHD and chronic fatigue. They take too many vacations as well (Two week break around Easter does not help us get anywhere). This is a f'ing national emergency.

[2naSalit]

14. And that's why she actually won by 3mil+ votes.

Truly presidential.

[triron]

25. I Hope Rachel can get her to come on her show.

Rachel has asked btw.

[2naSalit]

28. Yup, saw that.

I hope she does too. I'm guessing she will.

[Kurt V.]

15. 2 problems. trump is already instructing ppl to not cooperate. dem leaders have resisted

Impeachment talk. please (actual president) Hillary Clinton, make a call to the speaker.

[dalton99a]

16. Kick

"A crime was committed against all Americans, and all Americans should demand action and accountability."

[KewlKat]

17. K&R

[Roy Rolling]

18. The False Choice is the Bait

Impeach Now?
Wait for 2020?
There's a third choice: Subpoena, investigate, hold hearings, collect evidence, 24/7 and then measure if Impeach Now will rid America of Russian Trumpism.

Or whether wearing them out with death by a thousand cuts is better. Trump is the symptom of a rotten body politic infected by Republicanism. Here's our chance to win the WAR, not just the BATTLE.

And by that, get rid of Citizens United, Fairness Doctrine repeal, anti-science non-cooperation with the world, and generally dickish behavior of Republican parasite politicians. It's a goal.

[Fiendish Thingy]

20. She's right about the false choice

Very few are suggesting "immediate impeachment" as in pass articles and send to the floor for a vote right now.

Most who are pro impeachment are favoring opening an impeachment INQUIRY right now, as this would cut through Trump's obstructionist bullshit, and allow Congress access to all information, to empower them to conduct and thorough, relentless investigation of all Trump's crimes.

Lawrence suggested last night that Pelosi is playing "rope a dope" with Trump; I can support this for a short period, say until the end of May, when Barr and Meuller are scheduled to testify, and the testimony of Cline and others can be scheduled. Multiple dealings for turning over Trump's taxes will have passed by then as well.

Giving Trump, Barr, et al until the end of May to comply is more than fair. If they haven't by then, Pelosi should allow Nadler and any other committee chairs (they may need to make a select committee of Judiciary, Intelligence, Oversight and others) to open an Impeachment Inquiry. The inquiry should not be rushed, but should be relentless and merciless. If they do their job properly, Amazon shipments of Depends to the DC area should spike quickly.

While the inquiry should not be rushed, neither should it stand by while Trump consolidates his dictatorial powers. Appeals to SCOTUS should be used sparingly and strategically; instead, citations contempt should be issued, as well articles of impeachment for Contempt of Congress should be drawn up for Trump, Barr, Mnuchin and any others who dare obstruct.

Even with Trump's obstructions, there is enough evidence in the public record from Meuller's report and court transcripts to bring articles of impeachment to a floor vote by Fall/early Winter 2019. Again, if Congress, and the media, are doing their jobs, support for impeachment should rise, and Trump's approval should drop. A senate trial, on the eve of the primaries, should create enough pressure on the 20 GOP senators running for reelection that if they don't vote to convict, they may be forced into retirement, to the Dems advantage. Some may choose to vote to convict AND retire.

Any other course of action that does not include the opening of an impeachment inquiry is, IMO, the equivalent of doing nothing to defend the Constitution. While we can think strategically about the election, the Constitution can't wait until 2020 - the time for battle is now.

[triron]

26. Yep.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

21. K&R

[struggle4progress]

23. "Nobody but Americans should be able to decide America's future"

[spanone]

24. K&R...👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼

[Botany]

27. Eloquence

"A crime was committed against all Americans, and all Americans should demand action and accountability. "

[NNadir]

30. Putin's successful attack on America may be...

...the most serious since Pearl Harbor, maybe worse because FDR was not a Japanese asset.

[SunSeeker]

31. You omitted the paragraphs from her piece about how to respond!

Last edited Thu Apr 25, 2019, 12:52 PM - Edit history (1)

Hillary is calling for formal impeachment investigation hearings:

Watergate offers a better precedent. Then, as now, there was an investigation that found evidence of corruption and a coverup. It was complemented by public hearings conducted by a Senate select committee, which insisted that executive privilege could not be used to shield criminal conduct and compelled White House aides to testify. The televised hearings added to the factual record and, crucially, helped the public understand the facts in a way that no dense legal report could. Similar hearings with Mueller, former White House counsel Donald McGahn and other key witnesses could do the same today.

During Watergate, the House Judiciary Committee also began a formal impeachment inquiry that was led by John Doar, a widely respected former Justice Department official and hero of the civil rights struggle. He was determined to run a process that the public and history would judge as fair and thorough, no matter the outcome. If today’s House proceeds to an impeachment inquiry, I hope it will find someone as distinguished and principled as Doar to lead it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hillary-clinton-mueller-documented-a-serious-crime-against-all-americans-heres-how-to-respond/2019/04/24/1e8f7e16-66b7-11e9-82ba-fcfeff232e8f_story.html?utm_term=.108a5648959e

Hillary should know, she was there. The process started with a formal House Resolution: "An impeachment process against Richard Nixon was formally initiated on February 6, 1974, when the United States House of Representatives passed a resolution, H.Res. 803, giving its Judiciary Committee authority to investigate whether sufficient grounds existed to impeach Richard Nixon, the 37th President of the United States of high crimes and misdemeanors, primarily related to the Watergate scandal....The Judiciary Committee set up a staff, the Impeachment Inquiry staff, to handle looking into the charges, that was separate from its regular Permanent staff. Based upon the recommendations of many in the legal community, John Doar, a well-known civil rights attorney in the Kennedy and Johnson administrations who was a long-time Republican turned Independent, was hired by Rodino in December 1973 to be the lead special counsel for the Impeachment Inquiry staff. Doar shared with Rodino a view that the Senate hearings had gone overboard with leaked revelations and witnesses compelled to testify under immunity grants; they were determined to do things in a more thorough and objective process." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_process_against_Richard_Nixon

That is what we need to do now.

As I have also been saying for days (although Hillary does not mention it in her piece, BUT I AM SURE SHE KNOWS), regular oversight hearings do not give authority to Congress to obtain Mueller's grand jury info, only formal impeachment proceedings can do that.

As Lawrence Tribe stated in the Washington Post:

The uncertain prospect that the House Judiciary Committee will receive the raw, unredacted report generated by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III got even less certain Friday. A decision by the federal court of appeals in Washington now confronts the House leadership and Attorney General William P. Barr with some difficult political choices.

In a 2-to-1 decision in McKeever v. Barr, the court reaffirmed the principle of grand jury secrecy and concluded that a court has no “inherent power” to release grand jury information. This decision will give Barr a plausible basis to resist the Judiciary Committee’s subpoena of the entire Mueller report, even if the committee goes to court to enforce it. But both the House and the attorney general have ways to cope with this obstacle, if they have the political will and the professional judgment to do so.

In McKeever, two Republican appointees, including President Trump’s former deputy White House counsel, concluded that grand jury information must remain confidential unless a request for disclosure falls within one of the narrow exceptions listed in the federal rules of criminal procedure. The court refused to allow the disclosure of grand jury proceedings relating to the 1957 indictment of an FBI agent suspected of conspiring with the regime of Dominican Republic dictator Rafael Trujillo to kidnap and murder an outspoken critic. Even though all the witnesses and principals died long ago, the court concluded that a historian writing a book about the incident could not get access to the grand jury proceedings.

In the face of Barr’s decision not to disclose any of the Mueller report to the public or even to the House Judiciary Committee chaired by Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D- N.Y.) until Barr and his team have scrubbed the report of grand jury information (and other material), Nadler and committee Democrats have authorized a subpoena for the full report, setting the stage for a court fight over the committee’s right to see grand jury information. Although the public need underlying the request for disclosure in McKeever was much less pressing, the decision in that case undermines the position of Nadler’s committee, because the controlling federal rule contains no exception allowing congressional “oversight” committees to demand access to otherwise secret grand jury proceedings.

One of the exceptions to grand jury secrecy is disclosure “preliminary to or in connection with a judicial proceeding.” To authorize disclosure of the Watergate grand jury information, the special prosecutor’s office argued that the House had authorized its Judiciary Committee to conduct a formal impeachment inquiry and that such an inquiry could be fairly analogized to a “grand jury” investigation and thus a judicial proceeding. Both the district court and the court of appeals agreed, and the Judiciary Committee obtained both the report and the underlying evidence.

Significantly, the appeals court decision several days ago reaffirmed that exception. All three judges agreed that an impeachment inquiry falls within the “exception for judicial proceedings” and “coheres” with other rulings about the proper scope of grand jury secrecy.

But Pelosi has declined to allow the Judiciary Committee to open even a preliminary impeachment inquiry, asserting rather bizarrely that Trump is “not worth it.” That decision may hamstring Nadler’s quest for the complete Mueller report. Nothing in the federal rules creates an explicit exception allowing congressional committees exercising general powers of government “oversight” to demand access to secret grand jury material. So, Pelosi and Nadler are confronting a dilemma of their own making: either revisit the politically fraught impeachment question or concede that the House is at the mercy of whatever judgment the attorney general makes in excising grand jury information, which may include the most salient material about possible collusion and obstruction of justice.

For his part, Barr also has delicate judgments to make. If he is so inclined, the attorney general could properly opt to exclude only the names and actual testimony of grand jury witnesses while nevertheless informing the Judiciary Committee — and the public — about the substance of the information developed during the proceedings. Unfortunately, Barr has given every indication that he intends to make needlessly sweeping redactions, especially having ruled that, in his judgment, the evidence of obstruction of justice did not rise to the level of a prosecutable crime. Trump’s selection of his new attorney general may prove to be his best line of defense — unless Pelosi revisits her stance and directs the House Judiciary Committee to include impeachment within its investigatory ambit.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-full-mueller-report-could-be-released--if-the-house-opens-impeachment-hearings/2019/04/08/e47fff42-5a14-11e9-a00e-050dc7b82693_story.html

Not only would trying to recreate the grand jury testimony be time-consuming and wasteful in a regular oversight hearing, now that the White House has ordered all Trump aides, including McGahn, to not respond to Congressional subpoenas, it will be next to impossible to do it in light of case law. But not if it is a formal impeachment investigation hearing.

That is why we must go this route, and do it immediately.

[patphil]

32. The Republicans are trying to force a quick impeachment vote

They want to characterize it as a purely partisan action...all Democrats with little or no Republican support in the house, and none in the Senate.
The best approach is to schedule hearings, push through all the phoney-baloney presidential obstruction over supoenas and make this a quest for truth.
The more the president blocks House action, the worse it makes him look.
It's not his base we are concerned with, it's the 60% of all voters that are not part of his base.
They have to see and hear all the testimony that is behind the Mueller Report.
Public hearings is how this all starts.
If we run out of time, well then at least we will have gotten the truth out.
Then the Democratic Presidential Campaign can carry the truth to the electorate.

Patrick Phillips

[SunSeeker]

35. No, how this starts is with formal impeachment investigation hearings.

That is what Hillary is calling for.

[DesertRat]

33. k&r

[calimary]

34. Still love you Hillary. You won. By a very large margin of the popular vote.

I’m not forgetting that one ANYTIME soon.