Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Regardless of Barr and his DOJ memo, the Constitution is clear that Congress can and should hold a sitting President accountable for criminal behavior.
That is exactly what they are exploring now.
In an Impeachment Investigation, the House acts like a grand jury. Investigations into alleged criminal conduct are not done in public.
If the House impeaches, which is like an indictment, Trump can confront witnesses at the Senate trial, and viewers can watch it all in real time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa
But there should be some assurances of reliability of evidence. Closed door hearings, anonymous "witnesses", hearsay on hearsay (with each stage not subject to an evidentiary exception, trial by leak etc. have no such assurance.
What about the bolded part of how the House inquiry is like a grand jury is difficult for you to understand?
Do you have the expectation that the prosecution in a trial must release every thread of evidence they are following before they present their case? Of course not. That would impede the process. You judge the reliability of the witnesses and their testimony when the case is actually presented. Let the normal process unfold as it should. You will see the evidence when they present it following their investigation.
You keep the hearings closed door to protect the testimony of those who have already been there. Sondland is due to testify Thursday, but he doesn't have a clue what Marie Yovanovich and Fiona Hill had to say about him, or anything else. The secrecy greatly increases the chances that he will tell the truth, rather than try to explain his way out should he get caught perjuring himself.
I don't think Sondland will hold back, anyway. He has too good a life without Trump to screw it up and go to prison at age 62. Besides - his wife will kick his butt into next week if he fluffs this one.
The reason Nancy is not moving forward with a full house vote on impeachment just yet is two fold.
1. There's nothing in the constitution concerning impeachment that say's she has to.
2. With new revelations every day from Trump Administration officials, the support for impeachment grows among voters and even congress people. She will let support for impeachment peak and then she'll hold a full house vote. I'll bet that in a month the numbers favoring impeachment will be much greater than it is now, with all the daily disclosures to sway public opinion.
It's called political strategy to get what you want. Similar to McConnell withholding Merrick Garland from a senate hearing concerning his SCOTUS nomination until the political winds were favorable for the republicans.
Trump screams about transparency from democrats while blocking every government official from testifying to the house even under subpoena, not releasing his tax returns when court ordered to do so and hiding in a cyber black hole all his correspondence with Putin, Saudi Arabia and others. If Trump wants transparency, he should show some first like the example he is supposed to be.
All through the Obama administration, Republicans have shown the democrats the way to play muddy politics and the art of the double cross. We're slow, but we learn.
We owe the GOP an undying debt of gratitude for being such wonderful sensei.
lol.... the only people who care about this are the butthurt yahoo's leftover from the 2016 election and hated Trump since Nov 6, 2016. The average Joe is off at work, raising kids, living life, nor caught up in this silliness. So he asked a foreign leader to check into a former VP's son ... a cokehead for decades, military reject, suddenly given a $50K a month job in a field he has no knowledge about.
That job opportunity happening for your kid? Me either. It should be looked into.
Trump isn't going anywhere and when you lose this time, you've effectively lost in 2020.
So, when did russia release these emails...you know, the 30K that were deleted.....because that is what he stated....
So, when did russia release these emails...you know, the 30K that were deleted.....because that is what he stated....
You could, of course, refer to your claimed knowledge about the Mueller Report. You know, where they discuss "GRU Hacking Directed at the Clinton Campaign" (page 36, Vol. 1), "The GRU’s Transfer of Stolen Materials to WikiLeaks" (page 45, Vol. 1),"WikiLeaks’s October 7, 2016 Release of Stolen Podesta Emails" (page 58, Vol. 1), "DC Leaks" (page 45, Vol. 1) and Guccifer 2.0 (page 46, Vol. 1). That should be more than enough to get you up to speed.
John Yoo's opinion? You are going to have to do better than that, particularly given his questionable legal analyses in the past...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
