Impeachment

[RoseMorninStar]

elengil, those sound very close to the words I've heard Trey Gowdy use justifying closed door hearings (which he also utilized when questioning Strzok and Comey, at the least.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

The difference is that the Benghazi hearings were not styled as impeachment hearings which would potentially lead to the removal of the president from office. Instead, they were a thinly-hidden exercise in attempting to politically tar the already virtually presumptive 2016 Democratic nominee for president, as then Majority Leader (and now Minority Leader) Kevin McCarthy (the representative from Griffy and Faramond's district, I believe) subsequently explicitly acknowledged, which then prevented him from succeeding John Boehner as Speaker of the House (though it did not prevent him from succeeding Paul Ryan as the top Republican in the House, though at that point they had lost the majority).

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Meanwhile, from CNN's ubiquitous "live impeachment updates":

Then-Rep. Lindsey Graham, at a November 1998 press conference one day after special prosecutor Ken Starr publicly testified before the House Judiciary Committee, praised the Judiciary panel’s plans to hold depositions before conducting public hearings. Graham was a key Republican on the Judiciary Committee and was one of the House impeachment managers during the Senate trial that followed.

Asked by a reporter in 1998 if he thought there would be hearings with “some of the principals,” Graham said: “The depositions, I think, will determine whether or not we go forward with hearings. I think it's a very smart thing to do, to depose these people and find out what they've got to say and not drag this thing out unnecessarily. And it's going to end by the end of the year.”

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Bolton lawyers in talks about possible impeachment deposition

If Bolton does testify, he would certainly be the biggest name yet. But Tim Morrison, who is referred to in that article, could provide the more damning testimony, if he confirms the substance of some of what Ambassador Taylor stated to be true.

Sent from my LG G6 using Tapatalk

[Griffon64]

then Majority Leader (and now Minority Leader) Kevin McCarthy (the representative from Griffy and Faramond's district, I believe).

Oh, Kevin McCarthy. Most conservatives in his district love him. They'll vote R anyway come hell or high water, but they specifically will vote for him as opposed to an R challenger because they believe that he will use his power in Congress to do great things for Bakersfield, based on what people I've talked to have told me, or what I've read in the local paper from interviews with constituents over the years. ( In the eight years he's been seated, he hasn't yet. Bill Thomas was the last powerful R who brought anything to Bakersfield. The place is a hive of road construction right now thanks to Bill Thomas ). So, Kevin McCarthy is secure in his re-election and can do what he pleases. Here's an article from Bakersfield's local paper that explains a little bit about how McCarthy got where he is, and why he is so powerful: https://www.bakersfield.com/columnists/ ... c74f2.html

As a side note, we're no longer in McCarthy's district. We traded Bakersfield for fresh air a couple months ago. I don't know much about the R who's now our House rep ( haven't had the energy to research him yet ) but I sure hope he's a little less attached to Donald Trump than Kevin McCarthy.

[RoseMorninStar]

Tim Morrison was directly involved in 'the' phone call to Ukraine, so that should be interesting. Bolton too. I don't have much use for Bolton, but even he could see that things were not being done legally. The wheels are coming off the clown car.
What is so disturbing about everything that Trump does is that, at it's very essence, it appears to being done for the benefit of Putin/Russia.

:osgilliation: Griffy and Faramond.. congrats on your move. I hope you enjoy your new digs! /osgilliation

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I couldn't decide whether to put this in the Impeachment thread or the Russian Investigation thread, since it directly relevant to both. So I am putting it in both.

House impeachment investigators can see Mueller grand jury materials, judge rules

[Voronwë the Faithful]

This is interesting.

Former Bolton aide asks court if he's required to testify in impeachment probe

Since Kupperman is scheduled to testify on Monday, I think it is a fair bet that he won't be showing up.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I've read Kupperman's lawsuit, and he basically asks the court to decide too questions. One is whether the House impeachment inquiry is valid without a vote. Judge Howell emphatically answered in her opinion granting the House access to the grand jury material that it is, and I don't think there really is an argument otherwise. The other is whether the president can assert absolute privilege with regard to former advisors like Kupperman (and his former boss, John Bolton). That is the bigger question.

I tried to find what judge the case has been assigned to, but it doesn't appear that it has been yet. Stay tuned!

[RoseMorninStar]

V, in your opinion, do you believe these questions for the court were done strategically in order to clear the path for those who are concerned about testifying/remove objections or because they don't want to testify and are hoping that Trumps obstruction of testifying is reinforced? Or maybe it's for another reason/concern?

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Rose, that's a good question which I can't really answer without guessing. That having been said, if I had to guess I would lean towards the former over the latter.

The same attorneys that represent Kupperman also represent Bolton. I would further guess that while Bolton is not explicitly named as a plaintiff (he has not been served with a subpoena, unlike Kupperman), this is being done on his behalf as much as on Kupperman's.

Sent from my LG G6 using Tapatalk

[Voronwë the Faithful]

This is what would commonly be called a BFD.

WSJ: Sondland told the House that Trump's Ukraine pressure was a quid pro quo



Sent from my LG G6 using Tapatalk

[RoseMorninStar]

All of this 'back channel' dealing through improper channels reminds me of some things that came up early on in the Trump administration.. Erik Prince is one such person who comes to mind. Another is Jared Kushner.
For someone who claims to be so against the 'Deep State' Trump sure seems to be an old hand at setting up his own. It seems true that Trump is often guilty of what he accuses others of doing.

[elengil]

It seems true that Trump is often guilty of what he accuses others of doing.

That really just seems to be his MO.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Kupperman didn't show up for his deposition. It seems unlikely that the court will rule any time soon, so I doubt either he or Bolton will cooperate, but we'll see.

Meanwhile, House to vote on impeachment inquiry procedures

The vote is scheduled for Thursday. Republicans are already complaining.

Sent from my LG G6 using Tapatalk

[Voronwë the Faithful]

The Kupperman case has been assigned to Judge Richard Lyon a conservative appointee of George W. Bush.

Sent from my LG G6 using Tapatalk

[River]

The vote is scheduled for Thursday. Republicans are already complaining.

But of course. Was anyone expecting otherwise?

[Cerin]

This article (it may be the same one Voronwë linked to above) reports 'Democrats' as saying this is not a formal vote to authorize an impeachment inquiry, which is the hook the Republicans were hanging their non-cooperation on. The vote is to formalize procedures for public hearings. I don't have high hopes that the media will make this distinction going forward, based on headlines I've seen and the fact that this article contradicts its own information in saying that the Republicans will lose a talking point. They don't actually lose their talking point, as they will still not have the vote authorizing the inquiry and therefore can still make the same claim of illegitimacy.


https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/28/politics ... index.html

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Today, the National Security Council's top Ukraine expert, Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, is testifying. He plans to tell House impeachment investigators that he was so troubled by President Trump's July phone call with Ukraine's President (which Vindman was on) that he reported his concerns to a superior, according to his opening statement.

Vindman is a decorated veteran. That hasn't stopped Mr. Trump and other Republicans from attacking his patriotism, though some others, including Liz Cheney, have criticized those attacks.

Sent from my LG G6 using Tapatalk

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Meanwhile, Judge Leon has set a status conference for Thursday at 3:00 p.m. EDT in Kupperman's lawsuit. But he won't be ruling then, or any time soon thereafter, I'm sure, and I doubt the Democrats are going to wait around for a ruling from him. Still, it will be interesting to see what he says and what type of time period he sets.