The Impeachment of President Trump

[Aimless]

You didn't read the whole article, did you.

[Being]

Is there a statute of limitation on getting articles of impeachment to the senate?

[Dreadnaught]

Is there a statute of limitation on getting articles of impeachment to the senate?

Constitutionally, the House voting on impeachment means he's been impeached and the Senate has sole responsibility for running a trial. There's no requirement that the House "transmit" this vote; the vote is the impeachment. The Senate established internal rules for having an impeachment manager from the House but those rules can be overturned.

Pelosi and Schumer seem convinced they can turn this into an overwrought censure vote and then maybe delay until closer to the election.

[LittleFuzzy]

Is there a statute of limitation on getting articles of impeachment to the senate?

Yes, whatever the Senate cares to say it is. More practically, I don't think there's generally carry-over from one Congress to the next for issues submitted for consideration by the other house but I could be wrong on that.

It becomes increasingly clear that the Democrats are doing this only for 2020 election purposes. They know removal isn't going to happen. If Trump wins re-election it will be such sweet irony that Pelosi did it by pushing forward with this impeachment nonsense.

No, they did it because they were thoroughly outraged by Trump and could not hold themselves back from doing it even though it was probably going to hurt them a bit in 2020. Having gone ahead and done it, they may be trying to manage things to mitigate how much damage it does to them though.

[GGT]

I know - can you imagine a solid majority that regularly insists that the 1st and 2nd amendment rights be protected? Crazy.

If Trump wins re-election it will be such sweet irony that Pelosi did it by pushing forward with this impeachment nonsense.

The impeachment clause was written into the constitution and predates any amendments.

[Lewkowski]

It becomes increasingly clear that the Democrats are doing this only for 2020 election purposes. They know removal isn't going to happen. If Trump wins re-election it will be such sweet irony that Pelosi did it by pushing forward with this impeachment nonsense.

[Being]

So the house can hold off until after the election. Then, if Trump is reelected and dems make gains in the senate, the house can pass the articles of impeachment to the senate. Brilliant!

[Lewkowski]

So the house can hold off until after the election. Then, if Trump is reelected and dems make gains in the senate, the house can pass the articles of impeachment to the senate. Brilliant!

1. You can always be impeached twice so there really is no need to hold off.

2. Even if Dems win the senate they aren't going to get 2/3rds.

[Aimless]

Patience is a virtue:

Twitter Link

[Aimless]

Twitter Link

This man is a dumbass. Everyone who thinks he's being smart is also a dumbass.

[GGT]

Federal watchdog finds OMB violated law by withholding Ukraine aid

"Faithful execution of the law does not permit the president to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law. OMB withheld funds for a policy reason, which is not permitted under the Impoundment Control Act (ICA). The withholding was not a programmatic delay. Therefore, we conclude that OMB violated the ICA."

— GAO report

https://www.axios.com/gao-decision-omb-trump-ukraine-aid-2aab62ea-2e50-4301-bae7-afa5a88282ee.html


https://budget.house.gov/publication...does-it-matter

[Aimless]

Just leaving this here for your pleasure:

Twitter Link

[LittleFuzzy]

Just leaving this here for your pleasure:

Twitter Link

Doesn't exist.

[Aimless]

Hehehehe

Twitter Link

Twitter Link

[Aimless]

Humiliated coward tries to get ahead of the news of his merciless shaming:

[Lewkowski]

https://thefederalist.com/2020/01/25...n-soap-operas/

lol

"The lack of viewership for the Senate impeachment trial illustrates a public understanding of what a show trial the proceedings have become. In other words, Americans recognize the difference between performative actions full of useless bravado and events where major outcomes may result, such as the Kavanaugh hearings.

Democrats need at least 20 Republican senators to vote in favor of a guilty verdict, an event which is certain not to happen, given public support for impeachment has remained underwater for more than a month, according to Real Clear Politics’ latest aggregate of polls."

[Loki]

You realize the GOP is in charge of this "show trial", right? Interesting admission there.

[Lewkowski]

You realize the GOP is in charge of this "show trial", right? Interesting admission there.

Is it an interesting admission? Because the entire thing has been a farce from the beginning with the result already predetermined.

[Loki]

Maybe the GOP should take its constitutional duties a bit more seriously and not put on a show trial...

[Dreadnaught]

Federal watchdog finds OMB violated law by withholding Ukraine aid

"Faithful execution of the law does not permit the president to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law. OMB withheld funds for a policy reason, which is not permitted under the Impoundment Control Act (ICA). The withholding was not a programmatic delay. Therefore, we conclude that OMB violated the ICA."

— GAO report

https://www.axios.com/gao-decision-omb-trump-ukraine-aid-2aab62ea-2e50-4301-bae7-afa5a88282ee.html


https://budget.house.gov/publication...does-it-matter

Next at 10: Legislative office claims that executive office did not fulfill intent of legislation; legislative branch expounds on supremacy of legislative branch.

We've seen this story with the GAO lots of times over the years. The timing of this "finding" weirds me out.

[Aimless]

Next at 10: Legislative office claims that executive office did not fulfill intent of legislation; legislative branch expounds on supremacy of legislative branch.

We've seen this story with the GAO lots of times over the years. The timing of this "finding" weirds me out.

Gramps, before you descend into full Q-Anon conspiracy mode, please consider the possibility that 1. the actions Trump & co. took wrt withholding the authorized aid were indeed in conflict with the law (as was suspected by people who were involved with the process from beginning to end, judging from their emails to one another), and 2. the "timing" reflects the time it took for this business to be uncovered, end up passing legally defined deadlines, and then be investigated despite the admin's efforts to obstruct investigation. If the admin had cooperated, perhaps the finding would have come sooner. If the admin had been more skilled in its obstruction, perhaps the finding would have come later. If the admin had been busted sooner, perhaps the finding would have come sooner. If the admin had been busted later, perhaps the finding would have come later. That this decision appears to to coincide with the impeachment trial isn't strange given that it concerns the very matter that provoked impeachment in the first place.

[Dreadnaught]

Gramps, before you descend into full Q-Anon conspiracy mode, please consider the possibility that 1. the actions Trump & co. took wrt withholding the authorized aid were indeed in conflict with the law (as was suspected by people who were involved with the process from beginning to end, judging from their emails to one another), and 2. the "timing" reflects the time it took for this business to be uncovered, end up passing legally defined deadlines, and then be investigated despite the admin's efforts to obstruct investigation. If the admin had cooperated, perhaps the finding would have come sooner. If the admin had been more skilled in its obstruction, perhaps the finding would have come later. If the admin had been busted sooner, perhaps the finding would have come sooner. If the admin had been busted later, perhaps the finding would have come later. That this decision appears to to coincide with the impeachment trial isn't strange given that it concerns the very matter that provoked impeachment in the first place.

I'd encourage you to look at this through the lens of public choice theory, and recall that the US government has a distinct separation of powers that is always finding a slightly new center of equilibrium. But the legislative branch does not produce final determinations of legal breaches.

Within some limits, the GAO will produce a finding that is asked of it by its Congressional overseers. A staff lawyer's opinion for a branch of any bureaucracy is not settled law. Only judicial opinions matter.

[GGT]

I'd encourage you to look at this through the lens of public choice theory, and recall that the US government has a distinct separation of powers that is always finding a slightly new center of equilibrium. But the legislative branch does not produce final determinations of legal breaches.

Within some limits, the GAO will produce a finding that is asked of it by its Congressional overseers. A staff lawyer's opinion for a branch of any bureaucracy is not settled law. Only judicial opinions matter.

Sounds like you're on board with the GOP's tactics to defend Trump during the impeachment process:

The president can't be indicted for a crime while in office....so congress can't investigate potential crimes as part of their oversight.
Executive powers supersede congressional oversight, including impeachment proceedings....so they can ignore subpoenas for documents and witnesses.
Trump didn't do anything illegal...but even if he did, it's not an impeachable offense.
Even tho he's been impeached by the house, the senate should treat the whole thing as a witch hunt hoax....perpetrated by teh libruls.

You talk about separation of powers, and a new center of equilibrium, but can't see how the GOP is creating a really bad precedent for future presidents?

[Wraith]

I'd encourage you to look at this through the lens of public choice theory, and recall that the US government has a distinct separation of powers that is always finding a slightly new center of equilibrium. But the legislative branch does not produce final determinations of legal breaches.

Within some limits, the GAO will produce a finding that is asked of it by its Congressional overseers. A staff lawyer's opinion for a branch of any bureaucracy is not settled law. Only judicial opinions matter.

No, they don't. Judicial opinions won't matter until the criminal trial, and that doesn't happen until Trump leaves office. Right now, only the legislature's opinion matters.

[Aimless]

Trump told his national security adviser in August that he wanted to continue freezing $391 million in security assistance to Ukraine until officials there helped with investigations into Democrats including the Bidens, according to an unpublished manuscript by the former adviser, John R. Bolton.

Also poses problems for Pompeo, Barr and Mulvaney.

[Loki]

Is that you, Dershowitz?

[Aimless]

Trump spent the day lying, and either he or one of his allies shockingly tried to destroy his claim to executive privilege wrt Bolton's testimony. Meanwhile, Giuliani contradicted the official position that Trump was only talking to Parnas and Fruman at that dinner because Giuliani brought them; Fruity G now says he wasn't even at that dinner, and only got to know those two scoundrels much later. Stupid Watergate.

[Lewkowski]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/sen...orrect-finding

Honestly strange behavior by Roberts - here is the exact question:

"Are you aware that House intelligence committee staffer Shawn Misko had a close relationship with Eric Ciaramella while at the National Security Council together and are you aware and how do you respond to reports that Ciaramella and Misko may have worked together to plot impeaching the President before there were formal house impeachment proceedings?"

[Aimless]

Super strange from the perspective of a useless cretin who has his head stuck up his ass, yes. For all his flaws, Roberts is a real jurist—not some galaxy brain reddit lawyer. And that's why he told Paul to gfh, prompting this pathetic tantrum.

[Lewkowski]

5 days to go and this silly thing will be done.