White House says it will refuse to cooperate with impeachment inquiry

[Chomper Higgot]

2 hours ago, Kelsall said:

Did you read the Constitution?

Yes I did, but unlike you I understood it too.

[Chomper Higgot]

36 minutes ago, atyclb said:

who needs congress, the constitution, or due process when the most elite court in the land can judge him, the tvf court- law review.

You have grasped the fact this is a discussion forum?

[Sujo]

7 minutes ago, pedro01 said:

If you read the letter, it actually seems quite fair.

 

It seems they want 3 things

1 - To move Schiff out of the way - as his actions quite clearly show he's not neutral enough to oversee the proceedings. If there is a good case, I think that's quite fair. 

2 - To be allowed to cross examine witnesses, have proper representation and examine all evidence

3 - To have a vote on going ahead with impeachment - which effectively started by Pelosi, when she hadn't actually seen the letter yet

 

Point 3 seems moot. I can't see how the Dems will fail to get a vote for impeachment but points 1 & 2 seem fair. Why not make it a fair trial with due process?

Because it isnt a trial, its an investigation.

 

The trial is in the senate.

[Chomper Higgot]

6 minutes ago, pedro01 said:

If you read the letter, it actually seems quite fair.

 

It seems they want 3 things

1 - To move Schiff out of the way - as his actions quite clearly show he's not neutral enough to oversee the proceedings. If there is a good case, I think that's quite fair. 

2 - To be allowed to cross examine witnesses, have proper representation and examine all evidence

3 - To have a vote on going ahead with impeachment - which effectively started by Pelosi, when she hadn't actually seen the letter yet

 

Point 3 seems moot. I can't see how the Dems will fail to get a vote for impeachment but points 1 & 2 seem fair. Why not make it a fair trial with due process?

1. The President doesn’t get to choose who heads Congressional committees ( separation of power/Congress a separate and equal arm

of government).

 

2. An impeachment is not a court trial, it’s a political process. Trump will get a chance to cross examine witnesses, have proper representation and examine all the evidence during his criminal trials that will take place after he leaves office.

 

3. There is no requirement to ‘vote on going ahead with impeachment’, the impeachment investigation is in process, articles of impeachment will be drawn up by the Congressional Oversight committee and voted on by both houses.

 

Trump is the subject of the impeachment inquiry, he doesn’t get to choose who investigates him, who the witnesses may be or the order of the inquiry.

[Kelsall]

11 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

1. The President doesn’t get to choose who heads Congressional committees ( separation of power/Congress a separate and equal arm

of government).

 

2. An impeachment is not a court trial, it’s a political process. Trump will get a chance to cross examine witnesses, have proper representation and examine all the evidence during his criminal trials that will take place after he leaves office.

 

3. There is no requirement to ‘vote on going ahead with impeachment’, the impeachment investigation is in process, articles of impeachment will be drawn up by the Congressional Oversight committee and voted on by both houses.

 

Trump is the subject of the impeachment inquiry, he doesn’t get to choose who investigates him, who the witnesses may be or the order of the inquiry.

Have you read the letter to Pelosi and Schiff?  That lays out what Trump will and will not do.

[Proboscis]

5 hours ago, TopDeadSenter said:

Great news. Anybody could see this whole farce was a political witch hunt borne by a desperate realization the dems have no chance in the 2020 election. Trump is absolutely right to give it the respect it deserves - zero. 

 Now time for Schiff, Pelosi, Pelosi's son, Biden, Biden's son and the rest of them to face the music. Corruption is bad.

Actually I think that the 2020 election is going to be more interesting than you apparently do, not necessarily because of the Dems, but because of the primary that will have to take place among the Republican candidates. Trump will probably not lose the 2020 election because he will have lost the primary.

 

That said, I find your take on the American system of justice to be rather cynical. I mean, if there is so much corruption involving the Bidens and others, surely the law enforcement agencies (of which the USA has a large number) would have charged them by now?

[Sujo]

1 minute ago, Kelsall said:

Have you read the letter to Pelosi and Schiff?  That lays out what Trump is going to do.

Which is obstruction of justice. An impeachable offence.

[J Town]

6 minutes ago, Kelsall said:

Have you read the letter to Pelosi and Schiff?  That lays out what Trump will and will not do.

That is not Trump's decision. Congress decides what it will investigate, and since Trump has done nothing but perfect acts, he should have no trouble complying with the investigation. Unless he has something to hide?

[Nyezhov]

44 minutes ago, Sujo said:

Because it isnt a trial, its an investigation.

 

The trial is in the senate.

Excellent legal distinction. In my understanding, in a federal criminal case in the USA, a pututative defendant is not necessarily allowed to contest or produce evidence to the investigators, or to a Grand Jury, except to the effect that a known target of the investigation may testify, or more importantly, will provide exculpatory evidence to a prosecutors, since it is clear that it is the obligation of the gov to present exculpatory evidence under the terms of Brady vs Maryland do attach to the Grand Jury phase.

 

If you view then, the House of Reps as a "grand jury", then is there a duty to provide exculpatory information?

 

 

[Kelsall]

2 minutes ago, J Town said:

That is not Trump's decision. Congress decides what it will investigate, and since Trump has done nothing but perfect acts, he should have no trouble complying with the investigation. Unless he has something to hide?

Trump is on firm legal ground in his refusal to cooperate with this coup attempt that is disguised as an "impeachment inquiry."  The letter lays it all out. 

[Sujo]

1 minute ago, Nyezhov said:

Excellent legal distinction. In my understanding, in a federal criminal case in the USA, a pututative defendant is not necessarily allowed to contest or produce evidence to the investigators, or to a Grand Jury, expent to the effect that a known target of the investigation may testify, or more importantly, will provide exculpatory evidence to a prosecutors, since it is clear that it is the obligation of the gov to present exculpatory evidence under the terms of Brady vs Maryland do attach to the Grand Jury phase.

 

If you view then, the House of Reps as a "grand jury", then is there a duty to provide exculpatory information?

 

 

It is not a criminal trial, it is a political trial. Congress has the constitutional right to conduct it as they see fit. As do the senate if it gets there.

[Chomper Higgot]

2 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

Excellent legal distinction. In my understanding, in a federal criminal case in the USA, a pututative defendant is not necessarily allowed to contest or produce evidence to the investigators, or to a Grand Jury, expent to the effect that a known target of the investigation may testify, or more importantly, will provide exculpatory evidence to a prosecutors, since it is clear that it is the obligation of the gov to present exculpatory evidence under the terms of Brady vs Maryland do attach to the Grand Jury phase.

 

If you view then, the House of Reps as a "grand jury", then is there a duty to provide exculpatory information?

 

 

Congress is not a Grand Jury.

 

Next.

[J Town]

1 minute ago, Kelsall said:

Trump is on firm legal ground in his refusal to cooperate with this coup attempt that is disguised as an "impeachment inquiry."  The letter lays it all out. 

This is exactly the false logic used by Trump, and his blind followers sing from the same sheet music. It's called the democratic process, was established in the constitution, and trying to deny this is just flat out wrong.

[Sujo]

2 minutes ago, Kelsall said:

Trump is on firm legal ground in his refusal to cooperate with this coup attempt that is disguised as an "impeachment inquiry."  The letter lays it all out. 

Oh the letter with fake news and fake legal arguments.

 

please tell us what are the firm legal grounds that that overule the constitution.

[Chomper Higgot]

Trump hiding again, he’s coming off as a coward.

 

Nothing to hide, nothing to fear.

[atyclb]

23 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

1. The President doesn’t get to choose who heads Congressional committees ( separation of power/Congress a separate and equal arm

of government).

 

2. An impeachment is not a court trial, it’s a political process. Trump will get a chance to cross examine witnesses, have proper representation and examine all the evidence during his criminal trials that will take place after he leaves office.

 

3. There is no requirement to ‘vote on going ahead with impeachment’, the impeachment investigation is in process, articles of impeachment will be drawn up by the Congressional Oversight committee and voted on by both houses.

 

Trump is the subject of the impeachment inquiry, he doesn’t get to choose who investigates him, who the witnesses may be or the order of the inquiry.

i find it very reassuring and comforting having a constitutional scholar as yourself to guide us.

[Nyezhov]

Just now, atyclb said:

my friends with masters and doctorates in business finance, banking, markets ,trading that do think a tiny bit say the economy is on fire.

Our accountant says the economy is on fire. He does a lot of creative thinking too ????

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

Just now, atyclb said:

i find it very reassuring and comforting having a constitutional scholar as yourself to guide us.

I’d be delighted to address an corrections you have to what I have said.

[Sujo]

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

Trump hiding again, he’s coming off as a coward.

 

Nothing to hide, nothing to fear.

Not possible, he is the most transparent president ever. Thats why he said he would release his tax returns. Would sit down with mueller under oath.

[Scott]

Troll post and reply removed. 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

6 minutes ago, Sujo said:

It is not a criminal trial, it is a political trial. Congress has the constitutional right to conduct it as they see fit. As do the senate if it gets there.

Far as I know congress hasn't voted and it's just a sub committee at the moment, ergo "congress" is not conducting anything at the moment.

[PatOngo]

3 hours ago, Kelsall said:

Did you read the Constitution?

I'll bet you love the smell of napalm in the morning!

[Kelsall]

3 minutes ago, Sujo said:

Oh the letter with fake news and fake legal arguments.

 

please tell us what are the firm legal grounds that that overule the constitution.

Read the letter.

[Nyezhov]

7 minutes ago, Sujo said:

It is not a criminal trial, it is a political trial. Congress has the constitutional right to conduct it as they see fit. As do the senate if it gets there.

Sorry, you missed the import and meaning of my post. But no mind, some folks understand it.

 

But hey, have a nice day, off to the Sewing Lady Under the Bridge to modify my tripod carrying case, lots of fun stuff coming up here in beautiful Thailand!

[atyclb]

6 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

But hey, have a nice day, off to the Sewing Lady Under the Bridge to modify my tripod carrying case, lots of fun stuff coming up here in beautiful Thailand!

nothing like a man that gets his priorities straight. feel free to post before and after tripod case pics.

[Srikcir]

5 hours ago, webfact said:

"You have designed and implemented your inquiry in a manner that violates fundamental fairness and constitutionally mandated due process,"

No. Such "fairness and due process doctrine" is embedded in the judiciary system that address criminality.

The House operates in the congressional system. As such it need only comply with the specificity of the Constitution to address political abuse of power by the Executive Branch as related to impeachment - something the judiciary cannot as reminded by Mueller in his report hold authority. 

The House did not "design" their inquiry other than comply with the Constitution for Impeachment.

The House operates in effect like a Grand Jury in its impeachment investigation. The various House committee chairpersons act as the prosecution to convince the House to recommend an impeachment trial to the Senate. That is done by open House vote.

it is within the Senate that the accused Trump would be tried.

[Baerboxer]

5 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

"...Legal experts said the U.S. Constitution gives the House broad discretion to decide how to conduct an impeachment investigation and that the Supreme Court would not second-guess the procedures Congress adopts.

"They can do the investigation in more or less any order they want," said Frank Bowman, a law professor at the University of Missouri and the author of a book on impeachment..."

 

It is truly stunning to see the continual breaking of Democratic norms occurring in plain sight. It is even more stunning to see it occurring in silence from the Republican party; the Republican party has run for years on a platform of Rule of Law, Limited Government and respect for Law and Order. In one of history's truly great bouts of cynicism, the Republicans wailed against "Executive Over-Reach" by Obama amid concerns over the "Imperial Presidency", yet somehow don't seem to have a problem with it under Trump.

 

While the US does have a written constitution, its system of Governance relies heavily on the implied acceptance of many norms to allow it to function and on the parties/congressmen's pledge to enforce them. Sadly those norms, in this case the right of Congress to provide over-sight and to investigate an Administration, are being ignored and the US judiciary does not have the ability to work rapidly enough to meaningfully arbitrate the disputes. Put another way, the Trump policy of stone-walling each and every action by the Congress renders the US system of Government useless on a practical level, thus depriving Americans of the proverbial 'Check and Balances' they they believe they have, and installing an Administration that is De Facto is un-bound and un-checked. Is the US under Trump still Democratic? That should be a ridiculous question, but give it some thought; without oversight...

 

How does the US deal with this issue? The answer lies with the Republican party in congress stepping up to its constitutional duties and providing a counter-weight to the Trump Administration. However, to date the Republican party has not fulfilled its obligations, but has enabled the shredding of norms in clear contrast to its actions and rhetoric of the Obama years.

 

The actions of several members of the Republican party in the Nixon years have been called "Profiles in Courage" as members stood to put country over party and did the right thing. The current Republican party, with very few exceptions, is not acting in a similar vein.

 

It is a violation of the oath taken by Congressmen.

 

it is a dereliction of duty of the job of a Congressman.

 

It is a display of weapons-grade hypocrisy.

 

 

 

 

It's sad to see America sinking like this. Hypocrisy, lies, corruption - their whole political system seems riddled in entrenched corruption.

 

Trump, for all his undoubted faults, has opened a very nasty can of worms. It's very obvious that both Biden and Pelosi's sons have benefited from their parents positions. That in itself need investigating not sweeping under the carpet.

 

Just as Trumps actions and relationships do.

 

No hypocrisy - on both sides. 

 

Difficult when the US justice system and law enforcement senior positions are occupied by elected / appointed people linked to either the main two political parties! 

 

Incestuous nepotism, cronyism and hypocrisy. They've been allowed to get away with it too long. And to think these people lecture others on democracy, ethics and honesty. Usual case of do as we say, not as we do.

[Baerboxer]

21 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Far as I know congress hasn't voted and it's just a sub committee at the moment, ergo "congress" is not conducting anything at the moment.

 

Ah now you should know that factual detail is not important to the lefty posters when applied to the political side they like. 

 

It sounds better to them to call the sub committees 'Congress". 

[Sujo]

Just now, Baerboxer said:

 

Ah now you should know that factual detail is not important to the lefty posters when applied to the political side they like. 

 

It sounds better to them to call the sub committees 'Congress". 

Because its not needed. House rules have changed since previous impeachments. Now no vote is required.

[thaibeachlovers]

7 minutes ago, Sujo said:

Because its not needed. House rules have changed since previous impeachments. Now no vote is required.

Are you saying that a sub committee can now investigate to impeach without the approval of congress? That doesn't sound very democratic. Impeachment is a very big deal and should require a majority of the house in support.