April 23, 2019

Impeachment Article 10. President of the United States, unmindful of the high duties

of his high office and the dignity and proprieties thereof, and of the harmony and courtesies which ought to exist and be maintained between the executive and legislative branches of the Government of the United States, designing and intending to set aside the rightful authorities and powers of Congress, did attempt to bring into disgrace, ridicule, hatred, contempt and reproach, the Congress of the United States, and the several branches thereof, to impair and destroy the regard and respect of all the good people of the United States for the Congress and the legislative power thereof, which all officers of the government ought inviolably to preserve and maintain, and to excite the odium and resentment of all good people of the United States against Congress and the laws by it duly and constitutionally enacted; and in pursuance of his said design and intent, openly and publicly and before divers assemblages of citizens of the United States, convened in divers parts thereof, to meet and receive said Andrew Johnson as the Chief Magistrate of the United States, did, on the eighteenth day of August, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-six, and on divers other days and times, as well before as afterwards, make and declare, with a loud voice, certain intemperate, inflammatory and scandalous harangues, and therein utter loud threats and bitter menaces, as well against Congress as the laws of the United States duly enacted thereby, amid the cries, jeers and laughter of the multitudes then assembled in hearing, which are set forth in the several specifications hereinafter written, in substance and effect, that it to say, etc.


https://www.andrewjohnson.com/13ArticlesOfImpeachment/ArticlesOfImpeachmentII.htm

We could just copy/paste this one now.

April 11, 2019

How to get Mueller Report (and underlying evidence) and tax returns -IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS

While the clock is ticking, we are currently and will continue to deal with delay and stall tactics by Barr and are likely to head to court.

Except, If the House authorizes its Judiciary Committee to conduct a formal impeachment inquiry, thus a judicial proceeding, then it can get the Mueller Report, its underlying evidence, and his tax returns.

"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."

(co-authored by Lawrence Tribe, constitutional lawyer at Harvard law)

The full Mueller report could be released — if the House opens preliminary impeachment hearings

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?utm_term=.4c9c080819c2

I can't express my views on the matter more eloquently than our member DontBooVote:
"Impeachment is not a waste of time. It is an opportunity to lay the evidence on the table for all to see. If that evidence shows a conspiracy with russia and/or a case for obstruction of justice, then let every Senator log his/her vote and let the chips fall where they may.

Impeachment is IMPERATIVE for the sake of history and the historical record!

If he is found, by a preponderance of the evidence, to be guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors, and some Senators refuse to impeach, then so be it! We're no further at a loss than we are right now. Because it will be obvious to all, should the evidence show guilt, that the repug senators are to blame for a failure to impeach, not Democrats'.

And if the evidence shows innocence (yea, right! ), then the damage from Democrats from an acquittal will be mitigated by Democratic Senators voting with repugs to acquit leaving Democrats able to righteously claim that, in the end, they were fair to tRump and voted to acquit. "
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=12002637


Below, is an excellent article below which is an in-depth analysis of why the House must begin impeachment proceedings:

Impeach Donald Trump
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/03/impeachment-trump/580468/

April 1, 2019

What do you hope will be achieved if the full Mueller report is ever available to the American

public? Impeachment proceedings, satisfying your curiosity, swaying undecided voters in 2020, etc. etc. etc.?

January 21, 2019

Well, well, well... So I was NOT crazy to think something didn't smell right.

I wrote the following late Saturday night, after the WaPo story came out re: BuzzFeed article:
snipped

"Am I crazy to think the possibility exists that Whitiker "encouraged" Rosenstein to call Mueller's team to ensure a response/denial would be made public by the Special Counsel's Office, refuting BuzzFeed's reporting? (Of note: I remember Comey stating (before he was fired) in an open congressional hearing that some reporting about the investigation had not been accurate - but I don't remember him releasing a statement to the press saying any particular article was not accurate. In fact, I believe he made the point that he couldn't do that because then those stories he didn't refute would be taken as gospel, and he didn't want to set that precedent.)

With my tinfoil hat securely on my head, I do wonder if this unusual step (Rosenstein's office calling Mueller yesterday "to inquire if the special counsel planned any kind of a response" was because of the explosive effect this BuzzFeed bombshell story had and the amped up dialogue about impeachment? This Washington Post story implies that this Rosenstein phone call to Mueller wasn't preceded by earlier calls by Rosenstein asking Mueller if the story was accurate or not."

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=2248310

NOW:

https://twitter.com/GeoffRBennett/status/1087456074544939008

And

https://twitter.com/PamelaBrownCNN/status/1087439650208256000

And

https://twitter.com/ShimonPro/status/1087428060213846016


WTF?!? What's the REAL story and who's pulling who's strings?!! The stench is even stronger today...

January 20, 2019

"There's NO time and the nation's political and moral crises go way beyond criminal code."

https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1087073253489819649

What I think Laurence Tribe is referring to is this:

If there is a decision to proceed, the speaker would decide if the House Judiciary Committee handles the impeachment inquiry, or if a separate special committee is formed.

The special committee would be empowered to broaden the focus of the inquiry -- or investigation.

If the speaker assigns the House Judiciary Committee to investigate, there is no time limit placed on their investigation and a likely public hearing would be scheduled at the discretion of the committee chair to vote on the articles of impeachment.


https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/impeachment-process-works/story?id=51202880
________________________

"...go way beyond the criminal code." really frames the distinction between a Special Prosecutor's Investigation versus, the political impeachment process, especially in light of the DOJ's policy of not indicting a sitting president.



Here we are in Jan. 2019 with the Presidential Election campaign season of 2020 not far off.

We have no idea when Mueller's final report will be ready. (Don't get me wrong...he's a hero in my eyes)

We have no idea how and when the unclassified portion of Mueller's report will get to the public (AG nominee Barr said it would be a Barr Report, not a Mueller report)

We have potential litigation, possibly up to the Supreme Court, as to whether a sitting president can be indicted. How long will that take to be adjudicated?

Meanwhile, every single day this pathetic excuse of a man destroys our country...and we have 2 more years to go.

I am starting to agree with Laurence Tribe's analysis.

January 14, 2019

When was trump initially recruited to be an Russian asset? March of 1986 by the new Russian

ambassador. (his ties to the russian mafia predates this)

snipped:

"The Russian political education of Donald Trump began in March 1986, when he met the Soviet ambassador to the United Nations, Yuri Dubinin and his daughter Natalia Dubinina, who was part of the Soviet delegation to the UN..."

"As Natalia told the Russian daily newspaper, Moskovsky Komsomolets, when her ambassador father arrived in New York City for his very first visit, she took him on a tour, and one of the first buildings they saw was Trump Tower on Fifth Avenue. ...he was so impressed that he decided he had to meet the building's owner at once. ...in a highly unusual breach of protocol, Ambassador Dubinin and Natalia went into Trump Tower...and paid (Trump) a visit.

"A few months later, at a luncheon given by cosmetics magnate Leonard Lauder, Trump happened to be seated next to Ambassador Yuri Dubinin, who proceeded to flatter the young real estate mogul shamelessly. Trump later rhapsodized about the conversation in THE ART OF THE DEAL. One thing led to another, he wrote, and now I'm talking about building a large luxury hotel across the street from the Kremlin, in partnership with the Soviet government."

For the KGB, former KGB general Oleg Kalugin said, recruiting a new asset "always starts with innocent conversation, like this".

As Natalia explained, the Russian were off to an auspicious start. "Trump melted at once. He is an emotional person, somewhat impulsive. He needs recognition. And, of course, when he gets it he likes it. My father's visit worked on him (Trump) like honey on a bee."

from: House of Trump House of Putin by Craig Unger, pages 46-47. (Note: this book is THE book to read on Trump/Russia, IMO)


1986....

January 14, 2019

Remember this part of the Steele Dossier? pg. 11, Detail paragraph 3. Unwitting agent, says who?!?

I'll qualify this by saying while much of the raw intel in the dossier seems to be accurate, some may not.

However, it rankles me to hear "unwitting asset" so much on the cable news in the last days when referring to dotard.

I believe he started out as unwitting years ago, but over time became either a "witting asset" or a full on agent of Russia. I lean towards a compromised witting asset, well before he announced his candidacy.

Back to the Dossier section I referred to above:

"3. However in terms of established operational liaison between the TRUMP team and the Kremlin, the emigre confirmed that an intelligence exchange had been running between them for at least 8 years. (my bold) Within this context, PUTIN's priority requirement had been for intelligence on the activities , business and otherwise, in the US of leading Russian oligarchs and their families. TRUMP and his associates duly had obtained and supplied the Kremlin with this information."