Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Saturday, July 27, 2019

No matter what certain House Democratic leaders might say about the politics of the matter, there can now be no doubt that the committee is engaged in an investigation of whether to impeach President Trump. That [fact] is starkly presented by the petition the House Judiciary Committee filed in federal court on Friday.

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Through its petition, the committee seeks access to portions of the report by former special counsel Robert S. Mueller III that were redacted to protect grand jury secrecy. The panel also seeks grand jury testimony bearing on Trump's knowledge of criminal acts, Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and Russian connections to his campaign. Finally, the committee seeks grand jury testimony about actions taken by former White House counsel Donald McGahn....

It is settled law that House committees can obtain grand jury materials as part of impeachment investigations.

The Constitution itself does not use phrases like "impeachment investigation" or "impeachment proceedings." The Constitution's text and structure -- supported by judicial precedent and prior practice -- show that impeachment is a process, not a single vote. And that process virtually always begins with an impeachment investigation in the judiciary committee, which is already occurring.

#1 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-07-26 07:02 PM | Reply

This! This is what the Robert Mueller testimony was about. Get it on ------- live video record, the only digestible medium for America these days, what is in the report. Now, let the games begin. Hiya!

#2 | Posted by gavaster at 2019-07-26 07:05 PM | Reply

Consider the petition itself. In an official court filing, the committee has described its activities as an impeachment investigation. The committee's word on that matter should be all but final (and subject to substantial judicial deference). After all, under the Rules of the House for the 116th Congress, it alone has clear jurisdiction over presidential impeachment. "We are exercising our full Article 1 authority and continuing our investigation of the president's malfeasances," Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) told reporters on Friday.
This is likely why Pelosi spoke about being "sophisticated" today. For once (and for as long as it lasts) the Democrats are using their constitutional power to investigate Trump beyond his ability to thwart them without running around saying that an official impeachment inquiry has begun.

In many ways, the Democrats are trying to be reasoned by only willing to go full-throated if the evidence they're seeking is incontrovertible that Trump indeed has passed the threshold for initiating the formal impeachment process. When the facts are rolled out in testimony Dems are hoping that public opinion will swing in their favor. If not, raising more and more unquestioned Trump malfeasance during the election cycle will not do him any favors outside of his fervent base anyway.

#3 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-07-26 07:13 PM | Reply

The House has approved a resolution telling the committee to use "all necessary authority under Article I of the Constitution"; a report accompanying that resolution refers expressly to impeachment; an impeachment resolution has been referred to the committee; the committee and its chair have repeatedly said they are investigating whether to approve articles of impeachment; and the committee has now filed a petition in federal court seeking grand jury material on the ground that it falls within an exception applicable to impeachment investigations.

When we look at what the House has done -- and at what the Judiciary Committee is doing -- the message is clear: An impeachment investigation has begun. Where these proceedings will go remains one of the most hotly disputed questions in American politics. There is no denying, however, that they are impeachment proceedings -- and that the House is therefore entitled to the evidence it needs to answer the weighty questions before it.

#4 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-07-26 07:26 PM | Reply

This is a very clever way to make it look like impeachment is underway without actually launching an impeachment inquiry, which under House Rules requires written notice to the President along with instructions that he engage counsel. That hasn't been done yet, because if they had it would be front page news.

Nadler's filing cites impeachment decisions and cites to the Rules but does not state anywhere that I could find that a formal impeachment inquiry has commenced, just that an "investigation is underway". That may be forthcoming, but for now I guess it is only semi-official.

This was probably Nadler's agreed compromise with Pelosi after their screaming match yesterday.

#5 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-07-26 07:47 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#5 ROC

Self-delusion is part of the process. Chin up. You'll make it through this.

#6 | Posted by gavaster at 2019-07-26 07:51 PM | Reply

It's an initial preliminary pre-inquiry impeachment exploration exercise.

#7 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-07-26 07:53 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

There's always an investigation or two underway against Trump in that sad, sad Donkeyworld. They never amount to anything, except to give some nutjobs a chance to post a thread here and pretend that they know something nobody else does, like that TonyClowna. Some people just get TRIGgered by being able to post crap.

#8 | Posted by Spork at 2019-07-26 07:54 PM | Reply

"This is not a drill. This is a drill. The XO has the CON."

#9 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-07-26 07:54 PM | Reply

#6

Hey DRtard, I want the full official Inquiry to start. Do try to keep up.

#10 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-07-26 07:58 PM | Reply

This is the big one, Elizabeth!

#11 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-07-26 08:03 PM | Reply | Funny: 3

#11

That made me laugh.

#12 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-07-26 08:03 PM | Reply

Me too.

#13 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-07-26 08:05 PM | Reply

Enjoy:

This is the Big One!

#14 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-07-26 08:14 PM | Reply

#10 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

Your glee about what you think this will do to the Dem's Presidential bid is kinda not that veiled. So save us your faux support of the Dem Party and the impeachment and embarrassment of the Rep party. If you TRULY supported impeachment you would be decrying the Republicans for having elected a stooge. I haven't seen a single post of yours excoriating Republicans for electing Trump so pardon me while I call -------- on your faux support. Once you start posting negative commentary on Mitch McConnell and the Republican Party for not impeaching Trump, then you'll have some faint whisper of credibility. Until then, you're just a puff of hot air.

#15 | Posted by gavaster at 2019-07-26 08:22 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

This just happened:

House Judiciary Committee Vice Chair Mary Gay Scanlon and three other Democrats on the committee have jointly published an op-ed in the Atlantic this evening titled "Why We're Moving Forward With Impeachment." The article, co-signed by Scanlon, David Cicilline, Pramila Jayapal, and Veronica Escobar, lists off all the reasons you'd expect: Robert Mueller's findings, Trump's blatant obstruction of justice, the constitutional mandate, and the moral imperative.

In other words, House Democrats have begun the impeachment process against Donald Trump the correct way: with the kind of court filing that can help compel the evidence and testimony they need in order to lay the full extent of Trump's crimes bare for all to see. Today's impeachment kickoff isn't as bombastic as some were hoping for. But at least now there's zero doubt that this is in fact an impeachment kickoff, as House Democrats just made a point of invoking that word.

#16 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-07-26 08:25 PM | Reply

#15

Your glee about what you think this will do to the Dem's Presidential bid is kinda not that veiled.

That made no sense, I don't think this will affect the Democratic Candidates in the slightest right now, and I don't think a formal inquiry will help Trump.

So save us your faux support of the Dem Party

No problem, my utter disdain for them hasn't wavered in the slightest.

If you TRULY supported impeachment you would be decrying the Republicans for having elected a stooge.

Those things are only related in your hyper-partisan viewpoint. I didn't vote for Trump, but you can elect a stooge and not have to impeach him. You do have to impeach him if he obstructs justice, and I don't think that there is any question about that.

Once you start posting negative commentary on Mitch McConnell and the Republican Party for not impeaching Trump, then you'll have some faint whisper of credibility.

Oh, so I have to join the DRama Club, run in circles flapping my arms at how unjust everything is because Hillary wasn't coronated and rend my clothes every time Donnie Little Hands tweets.

Not happening, I am not a child.

Back on topic, impeachment is initiated in the House, which is controlled by the Democrats. Even if they could (but they wouldn't), the GOP has no power or inclination to start a formal impeachment inquiry, so whining about them is pointless.

At least Nadler is trying to move the ball forward, but the Trump Administration will continue to ignore the Legislative Branch until a formal inquiry is commenced.

And I see you and DNC Dannac the Magnificent can read minds.

So you got that going for you, which is nice.

#17 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-07-26 08:34 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#16

Publishing an op-ed in a very friendly magazine still doesn't satisfy House Rules on Impeachment, so while this is a step in the right direction it still isn't official.

Hopefully that will happen in the next couple of days.

Otherwise, this is just more Sound and Fury.

#18 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-07-26 08:36 PM | Reply

Even if they could (but they wouldn't), the GOP has no power or inclination to start a formal impeachment inquiry, so whining about them is pointless.

As long as they keep this going and subpoena McGhan, I'm satisfied with the at least perception that they are opening an inquiry. I'm sick and tired of Pelosi's insistence that House seats held by Dems are more important that the House conducting it's constitutional obligation of checks and balance over the executive branch. She's running out the clock and Nadler seems to be the only leader in the bunch interested in doing what's right despite potential political expediency.

So you got that going for you, which is nice.
#17 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

Bill Murray should run for POTUS.

#19 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-07-26 08:39 PM | Reply

#18

But to those who specialize in these matters, [an] all-or-nothing vision of the impeachment power is mistaken. The Constitution's text and structure -- supported by judicial precedent and prior practice -- show that impeachment is a process, not a single vote. And that process virtually always begins with an impeachment investigation in the judiciary committee, which is already occurring.

Consistent with its "sole Power of impeachment" and its prerogative to "determine the Rules of its Proceedings," the House can launch impeachment investigations in many ways. It most often does so through its judiciary committee, either based on the committee's own actions or a resolution directed to the committee; it may also pass -- but isn't required to -- a resolution directing the committee to investigate grounds for impeachment.


#20 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-07-26 08:55 PM | Reply

#17. ROC

Hahah!! Circle flapping INDEED!! lol. That you can't connect the dots between holding the GOP accountable for electing Trump and impeachment is not surprising. You're currently posting about 100-1 posts encouraging Dems to get on with impeachment, practically ignoring that this is the GOP's problem! They elected him! If you spent half as much time telling the GOP to get on with imprachemt you'd have some credibility. You don't think if the GOP introduced AOI in the House the Dems wouldn't run the investigations? Delusional.

Join the DRama club? You don't have to be dramatic to have integrity. It's just you're so delusional that integrity feels like drama to you. No surprise there though. Your absolute avoidance of posting anything negative about the GOP while demanidng the DNC eradicate what the GOP has foisted upon the nation is, again, not that veiled.

Justin Amash is the only GOP Congressperson worth a damn at this point. If even 15 GOP Senators came out in support of impeachment DT would be out of the office lickety-split and you'd have some credibility. Start posting that the GOP impeach Trump. They are the ones keeping DT in office.

BTW, every day Trump is in office and every bill he signs, no matter if you agree with it on principle, is tainted by his hand.

#21 | Posted by gavaster at 2019-07-26 08:57 PM | Reply

Say it ROC. Say that Mitch McConnell needs to come out in support of the House starting an investigation into impeaching Trump and that he will support and follow through on the results of the investigation up to and including impeaching Trump for high-crimes, misdemeanors, unethical behavior, and behavior unbefitting the President of the United States.

I'll wait. While breathing if you don't mind.

#22 | Posted by gavaster at 2019-07-26 09:03 PM | Reply

Alright. Bangledeshi food just arrived. I'll circle back tomorrow to read the admonitions posted.

#23 | Posted by gavaster at 2019-07-26 09:11 PM | Reply

Where the Russians behind it? Just like Mueller never heard of Fusion GPS?

Hahahahaha.

#24 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2019-07-26 09:20 PM | Reply

I've got it! Mueller was deliberately appointed by Russia to whitewash everything!

And the same people involved in the coup attempt did not let Hillary skate at all.

#25 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2019-07-26 09:25 PM | Reply

- Alright. Bangledeshi food just arrived.

What is that, like, oatmeal and horse flies?

#26 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-07-26 09:26 PM | Reply

"But... but... it's not, "formal"!!

RoCheney should be begging forgiveness for his Party foisting this clown on us rather than pettifogging the efforts to get rid of him.

#27 | Posted by Corky at 2019-07-26 09:32 PM | Reply

Asha Rangappa @AshaRangappa_

Guys, from now on we're going use code for "impeachment inquiry" so the kids (in the WH) don't know what we're *really* talking about. I propose "making lasagna."

E.g., "Huh. Looks like the House is going out to get ingredients to make lasagna."

#28 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-07-27 12:44 AM | Reply

David Priess @DavidPriess

So it's an "impeachment investigation" but it's not a formal inquiry?

To paraphrase Austin Powers's Dr. Evil:

"It's semi-impeachment. It's quasi-impeachment. It's the margarine of impeachment. It's the Diet Coke of impeachment."

twitter.com

#29 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-07-27 12:49 AM | Reply | Funny: 2

"Huh. Looks like the House is going out to get ingredients to make lasagna."

I don't know if Nadler's committee will atually do anything yet but I do know now what I am making for dinner.

#30 | Posted by danni at 2019-07-27 11:00 AM | Reply

ou're currently posting about 100-1 posts encouraging Dems to get on with impeachment, practically ignoring that this is the GOP's problem! They elected him!

#21 | POSTED BY GAVASTER

Actually, the voters elected him.

Initiating impeachment is 100% on Democrats. They control the House and that's where impeachment starts.

Say it ROC. Say that Mitch McConnell needs to come out in support of the House starting an investigation into impeaching Trump and that he will support and follow through on the results of the investigation up to and including impeaching Trump for high-crimes, misdemeanors, unethical behavior, and behavior unbefitting the President of the United States.

I'll wait. While breathing if you don't mind.

#22 | POSTED BY GAVASTER

So, now you've stolen DNC DAN's donkey suit?

Procedurally initiating impeachment is 100% on the Democrats. If Democrats lack the stones to get the ball rolling on a president they despise with every fiber of their being there is no way the GOP is going to pre-empt them. Nor should they.

#31 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-07-27 11:17 AM | Reply

Somehow, the House Democrats just managed to thread that needle in one fell swoop – at least in terms of getting the ball rolling. The House Judiciary Committee made a court filing yesterday which confirms that they're seeking the evidence and testimony in question because they're trying to determine whether Donald Trump needs to be impeached. This court filing is an impeachment inquiry, meaning the impeachment process has begun.

But because the House Democrats are kicking off impeachment with a Friday afternoon court filing instead of firing it out of a T-shirt cannon, they're not giving Donald Trump much of a rallying point just yet. He can run his mouth all he wants, but he'll have a difficult time firing up his base by whining about a mere impeachment court filing. After all, his supporters tend to view politics through a lens of "wall good, immigrant bad" and have no interest in the legal nuances of the impeachment process.

That means House Democrats have managed to start the impeachment process in a way that helps fire up their base, while making it difficult for Donald Trump to fire up his base, even while continuing to focus on the court battles over testimony and evidence that they're going to need to win first before they can file the actual articles of impeachment anyway.

Please righties, keep on saying that "This isn't the real impeachment" while Nadler and his committee keeps working during Congress' vacation break. After all, the Dems aren't doing anything important, they're just wasting time.

#32 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-07-27 11:46 AM | Reply

New impeachment inquiry? Of course they did and we suspect that they will have ongoing inquiries through 2024 : )

The good news about this is that the more they keep invested and in impeachment, the less the dems in the House accomplish which is fine by me and if kept front and center in the news it will talk a lot of 'air' away from the dem candidates.

#33 | Posted by MSgt at 2019-07-27 11:50 AM | Reply

A leading impeachment scholar, professor Michael Gerhardt recently told Congress in testimony, the Constitution has no prescribed rules for how the House should consider impeachment and there is a rich history of Committees considering impeachment without a vote to initiate a formal impeachment inquiry. Our point is that when the House operates within this zone of the exercise of its impeachment authority, it may already obtain extra powers of investigation that come with that authority.

In short, the impeachment power is not triggered by an on-off switch of opening an impeachment inquiry. Rather it is a continuum, and in some cases the House may be even more clearly along that continuum.

Take for example grand jury information. As we explain below, judicial precedents show that courts have been willing to authorize the sharing of grand jury materials for the House to consider for purposes of impeachment prior to the House Judiciary Committee or the House as a body voting to open an impeachment inquiry. What's more Congress's need to obtain the information to decide whether to initiate an impeachment inquiry is "necessary and proper" to Congress's full exercise of its impeachment power. It would be perverse to require the House of Representatives to take the nation down the disruptive road of impeachment, by initiating an inquiry, in order to access the very information it needs to inform its decision whether or not to do so.

Due to recent steps taken by the House, the House Judiciary Committee, and House members, the best assessment is that the House is already acting in exercise of its impeachment authority.

#34 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-07-27 12:43 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Please righties, keep on saying that "This isn't the real impeachment" while Nadler and his committee keeps working during Congress' vacation break. After all, the Dems aren't doing anything important, they're just wasting time.

Those of us with a conservative bent don't need to say it because Nadler himself said this:

Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee told reporters Friday that they don't need to launch a formal impeachment inquiry because they're essentially conducting one already with their investigation into President Trump.

"In effect," committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler said when asked if the panel's ongoing probe is effectively the same as an impeachment inquiry.

The only difference, the New York Democrat said, is with a formal impeachment inquiry the panel would only be considering impeachment.

"That's not what we're doing . ... We're not limited to that," Nadler said."

Judiciary Democrats say they have effectively begun an impeachment inquiry already

So by Nadler's own admission, they are not pursuing a formal impeachment proceeding, just announcing that they are going to keep doing what they have been doing.

Without a formal inquiry, their subpoenas remain legislative in nature by law (a formal inquiry bestows criminal investigation status on them), this is just a smokescreen to appease the base unless some friendly judge writes new law on this issue.

If the subpoenas retain legislative status, Trump is going to keep ignoring them and asserting executive privilege and the Courts may allow him to do that until he starts getting criminal subpoenas.

#35 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-07-27 02:05 PM | Reply

So by Nadler's own admission, they are not pursuing a formal impeachment proceeding, just announcing that they are going to keep doing what they have been doing.

If appears that you cannot comprehend your own posted quotations very well.

Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee told reporters Friday that they don't need to launch a formal impeachment inquiry because they're essentially conducting one already with their investigation into President Trump.

"In effect," committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler said when asked if the panel's ongoing probe is... the same as an impeachment inquiry.

If something is the same as an impeachment inquiry does that make it NOT an impeachment inquiry?

You're arguing against yourself. The reason the Democrats are doing what they're doing is likely contained in posts #3 and #32. Quick question: If the Democrats asked for a "formal impeachment inquiry" exactly how quickly would Trump and his minions take to Twitter and the airwaves screaming bloody murder? Are you seeing that reaction today?

Exactly.

#36 | Posted by tonyroma at 2019-07-27 05:37 PM | Reply

The good news about this is that the more they keep invested and in impeachment, the less the dems in the House accomplish which is fine by me and if kept front and center in the news it will talk a lot of 'air' away from the dem candidates.

#33 | POSTED BY MSGT

The good news about this is that the more they keep invested and in impeachment, the less the White House can accomplish which is fine by me and if kept front and center in the news it will talk a lot of 'air' away from the Trumpy's evil plans to fill his family coffers.

Turn about is always fair play in politics.

Never forget that.

Which means, of course, that if we had a President of ALL the People we could make this country and the world a better place more than twice as fast. If we could work together instead of using our energies against each other.

That will be Trumpy's sad legacy. 😔

As for this Congress. For political junkies like me it is the most fascinating class ever on American Government. One Branch of Government against an Other. With the third stacked.

And now... A Constitutional Crisis. The Greatest Show on Earth.

In slow motion.

🍿

#37 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-07-28 10:45 AM | Reply

#36

The point is, Tony, that even Nadler admits that he is putting lipstick on the pig: The only thing that has changed is that Nancy is allowing Nadler to spin what he has been doing as a kind of sort of maybe impeachment investigation to figure out if a formal inquiry is necessary.

In other words, nothing has changed but the spin.

#38 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-07-28 03:00 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Why not just beat him in the election? Oh yeah, the candidates..

#39 | Posted by Spork at 2019-07-28 09:19 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort