The Constitutional Crisis Thread

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Isn't this really about form and process? Trump the buffoon, clumsy idiot, who cannot control what comes out of his mouth at times, directly asks foreign leaders to investigate an opponent when he should have had layers between him and the actual petition. What he should have done is what the Clinton campaign did to start off the russiagate thing. Have Nellie Ohr, who worked for the firm (fusion gps) hired to get dirt on Trump in the form of the debunked "dossier" go to her husband, Bruce Ohr (#5 in the Obama Justice Department) and give him the flimsy opposition research in hopes he will initiate the investigation into an opponent. Layering gives plausible deniability and yet gets the investigation into an opponent going.

It never stops with this guy...

http://i.imgur.com/BOMcj4R.gif

[_Dr Exiled]

Isn't this really about form and process? Trump the buffoon, clumsy idiot, who cannot control what comes out of his mouth at times, directly asks foreign leaders to investigate an opponent when he should have had layers between him and the actual petition. What he should have done is what the Clinton campaign did to start off the russiagate thing. Have Nellie Ohr, who worked for the firm (fusion gps) hired to get dirt on Trump in the form of the debunked "dossier" go to her husband, Bruce Ohr (#5 in the Obama Justice Department) and give him the flimsy opposition research in hopes he will initiate the investigation into an opponent. Layering gives plausible deniability and yet gets the investigation into an opponent going.

It never stops with this guy...

http://i.imgur.com/BOMcj4R.gif

At least you didn't try and paint me as a 4chan'er for pushing back a little on the political orgy going on here. You know the Barr investigation rolls on and a member of congress referred Nellie Ohr to the justice department because she lied to congress. https://meadows.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=3029 Cue the "walls closing in ....."

I'm sure the still unnamed whistleblower with his second hand knowledge didn't come forward because of Barr's investigation. Or perhaps it is a misdirection play given to the democrats on a silver platter by the bumbling Trump?

Here is an article, for those interested, that tries to get at the heart of what is really going on.

https://consortiumnews.com/2019/10/08/the-new-yorkers-partisan-attempt-to-refute-its-claim-of-partisan-disinformation-on-biden-and-ukraine/

Investigate Trump, but investigate Biden and the other republicans for what they did in the aftermath of our coup in the Ukraine. Better still, how about we look at our history of attacking other countries or manipulating their elections so our corporations can enter and steal resources?

[_Gunnar]

Better still, how about we look at our history of attacking other countries or manipulating their elections so our corporations can enter and steal resources?

This part, at least, of what you said, I have no doubt about. This history of our government attacking other countries, manipulating their elections and/or engineering coups to replace duly elected leaders by absolute despots willing to kowtow to avaricious American corporations for their own selfish interests, is as bad or worse than anything we have accused the Russians under Putin of attempting to do to us in the 2016 election. But even if everything said in the quoted article is true about the Trump/Ukraine affair being overblown, Trump is still revealed as being both corrupt and stupid, and worthy of impeachment. I think it would be tragic if it turned out that impeachment of Trump failed because of overemphasis on this one accusation to the exclusion of most or all of the other provable and impeachable offenses of which Trump is guilty.

[_Dr Exiled]

Better still, how about we look at our history of attacking other countries or manipulating their elections so our corporations can enter and steal resources?

This part, at least, of what you said, I have no doubt about. This history of our government attacking other countries, manipulating their elections and/or engineering coups to replace duly elected leaders by absolute despots willing to kowtow to avaricious American corporations for their own selfish interests, is as bad or worse than anything we have accused the Russians under Putin of attempting to do to us in the 2016 election. But even if everything said in the quoted article is true about the Trump/Ukraine affair being overblown, Trump is still revealed as being both corrupt and stupid, and worthy of impeachment. I think it would be tragic if it turned out that impeachment of Trump failed because of overemphasis on this one accusation to the exclusion of most or all of the other provable and impeachable offenses of which Trump is guilty.

I'm sure Trump will get voted out, hopefully. I tread lightly on this next thing because of a backlash potential, but I think at this point, the impeachment case is weaker than what is needed to convince the senate to convict (that should be an obvious point). So, what I think it'll turn out to be, barring some new evidence, is a partisan food fight that doesn't excite the public and may turn them off leading to lower voter turnout that always benefits republicans. The public wants changes to healthcare, it wants to end the wars, and it wants jobs, jobs, jobs. Impeachment won't deliver on that. It's the economy stupid and I fear the real issues will get drowned out by the weak impeachment case that may help Trump in the end. Clinton gained in popularity playing the victim. Trump is too pompous to be good at victimhood but he could make some headway with the same voters that put him in office by attacking the "deep state" or whatever democrat boogeyman he sees. The economic, healthcare, and war issues will sink him, but they may not get a fair hearing. So, I think impeachment is a mistake if it drowns out the issues and I am afraid that is what will happen, giving Trump a better chance in 2020 than he should have otherwise.

[_Gunnar]

It may be true that the impeachment case for Trump is too weak for conviction, but only because, I suspect, that at this moment in time, almost anything short of Trump walking out of the Whitehouse with a gun and going on a shooting rampage on Pennsylvania Avenue will not be enough to convince the current Republican controlled Senate to vote for conviction with the required 2/3 majority. I think, though, that as more evidence of Trump's misdeeds and corruption continue to accumulate, more Republicans will become increasingly disillusioned about Trump.

I think it even more likely that public disapproval of Trump will continue to grow to the point that the current Republican Congress critters perceive a threat to their own re-electability if they continue to reject the impeachment of Trump, despite the continuing support of Trump's too slowly shrinking, sycophantic, fanatical base.

Besides that, given Trump's history of getting away with past peccadillos, refusal to listen to anyone's advice other than his own, and tendency to "push the envelope" to ever greater extremes after every time he perceives a victory, there is little doubt in my mind that before the next election, he will pull something so outrageous and extreme that even the current crop of Republican Senators will feel they have no choice but to agree to his impeachment and removal from office, if they hope to save their own political careers.

[_EAllusion]

It may be true that the impeachment case for Trump is too weak for conviction, but only because, I suspect, that at this moment in time, almost anything short of Trump walking out of the Whitehouse with a gun and going on a shooting rampage on Pennsylvania Avenue will not be enough to convince the current Republican controlled Senate to vote for conviction with the required 2/3 majority. I think, though, that as more evidence of Trump's misdeeds and corruption continue to accumulate, more Republicans will become increasingly disillusioned about Trump.

If I had to bet, at this point I think we're far enough along that Trump could not so subtly imply he wants Adam Schiff assassinated, have one of this followers get the hint, and not be impeached. He is almost entirely above the law.

[_Gunnar]

If I had to bet, at this point I think we're far enough along that Trump could not so subtly imply he wants Adam Schiff assassinated, have one of this followers get the hint, and not be impeached. He is almost entirely above the law.

I have thought about that too, and fear you are probably right. I would be horrified if it happened, but not greatly surprised.

[_Manetho]

It's not Carte Blanche power…

According to the Supreme Court decision in Nixon v. United States, it is carte blanche power. Congress can conduct impeachment proceedings however it wants, within the bare-bones rules laid out in the Constitution, and the judiciary cannot review those proceedings. Moreover, the handwaving about cross-examining witnesses, etc., wouldn't even make sense if judicial rules about evidence applied, because the House of Representatives' job in impeachment is equivalent to indictment, not trial, which takes place in the Senate. Reporters asked White House if it would cooperate with the House if it conducted the proceedings the way the White House wants them to; there was no reply. In other words, they're simply making up garbage excuses and would use a different one if the House did things differently.

The White House's second excuse, that impeachment amounts to overturning the results of an election, implies that no elected official can be impeached at all. The Constitution says otherwise, so this excuse is even worse garbage.

The third argument, that Trump did nothing wrong, would be beside the point even if it were true. When you're being prosecuted for a crime, you may think you did nothing wrong, but you make that argument in court, which in this case corresponds to the Senate trial. You don't get to ignore subpoenas just 'cuz.

The White House's arguments are, legally speaking, nonsense.

[_moksha]

At least you didn't try and paint me as a 4chan'er for pushing back a little on the political orgy going on here.

Good point. There must be some dividing line between 4chan and say anything. Who says starting false fires to mask the gun smoke at the Trump artillery line will not work? Remember, the best defense is an unending barrage of offense and no one can be quite as offensive at Trump Republicans.

[_Res Ipsa]

It's not Carte Blanche power…

According to the Supreme Court decision in Nixon v. United States, it is carte blanche power. Congress can conduct impeachment proceedings however it wants, within the bare-bones rules laid out in the Constitution, and the judiciary cannot review those proceedings. Moreover, the handwaving about cross-examining witnesses, etc., wouldn't even make sense if judicial rules about evidence applied, because the House of Representatives' job in impeachment is equivalent to indictment, not trial, which takes place in the Senate. Reporters asked White House if it would cooperate with the House if it conducted the proceedings the way the White House wants them to; there was no reply. In other words, they're simply making up garbage excuses and would use a different one if the House did things differently.

The White House's second excuse, that impeachment amounts to overturning the results of an election, implies that no elected official can be impeached at all. The Constitution says otherwise, so this excuse is even worse garbage.

The third argument, that Trump did nothing wrong, would be beside the point even if it were true. When you're being prosecuted for a crime, you may think you did nothing wrong, but you make that argument in court, which in this case corresponds to the Senate trial. You don't get to ignore subpoenas just 'cuz.

The White House's arguments are, legally speaking, nonsense.

I think your legal analysis is spot on.