"A Grave Charge and Momentous Moment Turn in the Impeachment Inquiry" CNN:

[Stuart G]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/04/politics/democrats-public-impeachment-case/index.html
______________________________________________________________________________________
Analysis by Stephen Collinson, CNN
Updated 7:04 AM ET, Wed December 4, 2019

The House Intelligence Committee summary accuses Trump of perpetrating one of the most serious political crimes in US history:

(CNN) — The stunningly consequential accusation spelled out in the Democrats' impeachment report represents the most sweeping effort yet to capture the span of President Donald Trump's alleged offense and to boil it into a crisp indictment.

In effect, the 300-page House Intelligence Committee summary of witness testimony, timelines and phone records accused Trump of perpetrating one of the most serious political crimes in the history of the United States.

The report is a roadmap toward formal articles of impeachment -- an argument to a nation split in two on Trump's political fate that there is no alternative but to remove him from office 11 months before the next general election over his pressure on Ukraine for political favors.

The stark charge that the House Judiciary Committee will take up in its first impeachment hearing Wednesday fits the gravity of Congress' most somber duty -- deciding whether to end a presidency.

It is that the 45th President presents an immediate, clear and future threat to American national security, the Constitution and the resilience of the republic's democratic self-governance itself.

[Squinch]

1. But WHY did they weasel out and avoid the salient words like bribery, extortion and blackmail?

WHY NOT use those words?? It is what happened!!

[malthaussen]

4. Because all three are strictly legal terms...

... requiring strictly defined proofs. Better to keep the accusations as vague and weaselly as possible.

-- Mal

[Squinch]

6. Yes, but his actions satisfy those proofs. As an example, extortion:

The essence of extortion by a public officer is the oppressive use of official position to obtain a fee. The officer falsely claims authority to take that to which he or she is not lawfully entitled. This is known as acting under color of office.

https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/extortion

[malthaussen]

7. I'll try to express my own appreciation of the matter...

... but I'm a layman, not a lawyer.

One of the reasons the Trump apologists keep screaming "No quid pro quo" is that there is judicial precedent to claim that unless there is an explicit offer of a thing for a thing, no violation has occurred. Explicit as in, "If you do this for me, I'll do that for you." The "transcript" does not contain such explicit phrasing, hence, no violation. At least, as far as the defense is concerned. Because it is a question of legality, it can go either way depending on how the judge and jury are feeling at the moment, and how good the arguments are. Now, there is also judicial precedent the other way: saying "Nice house you have here, be a shame if anything happened to it" contains no explicit threat, but every sapient human on the planet knows what it means. Unless, that is, they are driven by political partisanship, in which case words no longer have the meaning they once did.

This is an impeachment, however, not a criminal case. Political partisanship is a given. By avoiding legal terms over which the opposition can endlessly quibble, Congress can proceed with the enquiry without being bogged down in non sequiturs. Keep in mind, the opposition is striving to trap Congress into just that: levying an explicit charge which can then be "disproved" to the satisfaction of the GOP, and whatever mindless fellow-travellers are out there. Such charges are not necessary for an impeachment, and to contend they are is to play into the GOP's rather bankrupt strategy.

-- Mal

[duforsure]

2. Just a matter of time

Before compromised republicans in Congress get exposed, so look soon for some to start talking and turning on trump to keep out of prison , or get their sentence reduced. They know trump won't be loyal to them, and will huurt them no matter what they do to protect him. All GOP Congressional members involved are realizing they will be getting exposed, so expect their turning to save themselves with it soon as so much is exposed they know that's their only chance left. Their being complicit in the commission of crimes will come back to haunt them eventually, and they won't be talking pro putin and trump then , they'll be talking out against them.

[lagomorph777]

5. It's already happened in the report! Devil Nunes is fucked by his own phone.

[malthaussen]

3. That editor should be shot for "momentous moment." n/t

[Nitram]

8. "...the 45th President presents an immediate, clear and future threat to American national security,

the Constitution and the resilience of the republic's democratic self-governance itself."