BREAKING: House Argues in Court Filing Don McGahn Testimony Needed for Impeachment Evidence…

As we suspected, albeit against much criticism, House counsel Doug Letter has responded to the DC Appeals Court arguing the forced testimony of White House counsel Don McGahn is needed for evidence in impeachment trial. [Court pdf Avail Here]

This court filing today bolsters the unspoken background motive for delayed House Impeachment Managers.  The House Judiciary Committee is using impeachment as support for their ongoing effort to gain: Don McGahn deposition, and Mueller grand jury material (6e).  The goal is opposition research; impeachment is a tool to establish legal standing to obtain it.  Everything else is chaff and countermeasures.

[Scribd pdf linkDirect pdf link (w/ embed below)]

This court filing bolsters CTH analysis that rushed House articles are a means to an end. That is – a way for House lawyers to argue in court all of the constitutionally contended material is required as evidence for pending judicial proceedings, a trial in the Senate.

This would explain why all the prior evidence debated for inclusion and legal additions to “articles of impeachment” were dropped. Instead the House focused only on quickly framing two articles that can facilitate pending court cases.

Here is the full House argument:


REMINDER: The House Judiciary Committee (HJC) led by Chairman Jerry Nadler has been seeking: (1) Mueller grand jury material; (2) a deposition by former White House counsel Don McGahn; and less importantly (3) Trump financial and tax records.  Each of these issues is currently being argued in appellate courts (6e and McGahn) and the supreme court (financials/taxes).

Looking at the legal maneuvers from that perspective means the grand jury material is the unspoken goal and impeachment is simply the enhanced means to obtain it.

The 6(e) material relates to evidence gathered by the Mueller team for grand jury proceedings in their two-year effort to construct a case against President Trump.

Remember, the Mueller evidence was gathered during a counterintelligence investigation, which means all things Trump -including his family and business interests- were subject to unbridled surveillance for two years; and a host of intelligence gathering going back in time indefinitely. A goldmine of political opposition research.

Obviously if Jerry Nadler could get his hands on this material it would quickly find its way into the DNC, and ultimately to the 2020 democrat candidate for president. This material would also be fuel for a year of leaks to DC media who could exploit rumor, supposition, and drops of information that Andrew Weissmann and team left to be discovered.

Here is the DOJ Response:

Notice the DOJ is aware of how the HJC is trying to manipulate the system…



[…] “Pursuing an interbranch suit in court while simultaneously pursuing impeachment, and then using that litigation as part of the impeachment proceedings, is “far from the model of the traditional common-law cause of action at the conceptual core of the case-or-controversy requirement.” Raines v. Byrd, 521 U.S. 811, 833 (1997) (Souter, J., concurring). But that is exactly what the Committee has done. The effect of that choice is
to “embroil the federal courts in a power contest nearly at the height of its political tension.” Id.

Indeed, if this Court now were to resolve the merits question in this case, it would appear to be weighing in on a contested issue in any impeachment trial. That would be of questionable propriety whether or not such a judicial resolution preceded or post-dated any impeachment trial. Cf. Nixon v. United States, 506 U.S. 224, 232, 235-36 (1993).

The now very real possibility of this Court appearing to weigh in on an article of impeachment at a time when political tensions are at their highest levels—before, during, or after a Senate trial regarding the removal of a President—puts in stark relief why this sort of interbranch dispute is not one that has “traditionally thought to be capable of resolution through the judicial process.” Raines, 521 U.S. at 819.

This Court should decline the Committee’s request that it enter the fray and instead should dismiss this fraught suit between the political branches for lack of jurisdiction.

This entry was posted in 4th Amendment, 6th Amendment, AG Bill Barr, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, Impeachment, Legislation, media bias, Nancy Pelosi, Notorious Liars, President Trump, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Supreme Court, Typical Prog Behavior. Bookmark the permalink.

300 Responses to BREAKING: House Argues in Court Filing Don McGahn Testimony Needed for Impeachment Evidence…

  1. jambo says:

    They issue a likely legally unenforceable subpoena then impeach on the basis that said subpoena wasn’t complied with, because its likely legally unenforceable, then use that impeachment to attempt to force the court to order compliance with the subpoena based on the impeachment rather than the legal validity of said subpoena.

    It’s just circular nonsense. Kick it to SCOTUS, hand nothing over, nobody complies with anything.

    This crap ends in a November. Control of both houses.

    Liked by 32 people

    • trump20162024 says:

      The cr@p won’t end unless/until obozo and the hag are locked up.

      Liked by 15 people

    • … and all this without even considering the lack of Constitutional validity of the adopted Articles themselves:

      • There is no crime. Not a single page of the United States Code has been cited.

      • The substance of the accusations is what the English call “maladministration.”

      • This is a Bill of Attainder, where the House declares a person to be guilty, then punishes that person, all without trial or due process.

      Looking back, we will see that “the House of Representatives should have hired real lawyers.”

      Liked by 3 people

      • The Demon Slick says:

        It bothers me that they’re not raising the issue of the legality of the entire Mueller probe, ie that there’s a very strong possibility that the entire process by which the material was gathered was illegal.

        Liked by 4 people

        • ms doodlebug says:

          “The Committee is weighing legislative proposals to govern interactions between the White House and DOJ with respect to ongoing civil and criminal matters…” says a lot.

          The Committee wants to ‘govern’, to control, the Executive branch authority over the DOJ. That’s one helluva power grab…and that alone should be all the Court needs to hear to rule against them.

          Liked by 1 person

    • Phil Bacon says:

      Sounds like an ex post facto argument to me. DOA.

      Liked by 1 person

    • rayvandune says:

      Another bit of self-dealing is Schiff and other Democrats (under cover of Congressional immunity) suborning perjury to introduce false testimony, and using the same false testimony to support the impeachment charge!

      THAT ALONE should be grounds for SUMMARY DISMISSAL in the Senate, followed by the indictment of the Representatives involved.

      Liked by 2 people

  2. Magabear says:

    If I were the judge, I would simply say “If you needed this guys testimony so badly, why did you rush your shampeachment thru before I ruled on the matter? Case dismissed!”.

    What is apparent is that all the coup plotters for some reason (probably because they’re evil) decided they must shampeach before Christmas despite not having any of these court cases ruled on yet. They look like, and are, idiots.

    Liked by 13 people

    • BoreMole says:

      but you’re not a judge, and judge shopping is a thing.

      Liked by 6 people

    • I don’t think they look like idiots; they are really smart. The passed these just before Christmas because they knew most people wouldn’t notice and the Republicans would be gone and would be busy poohing poohing it. They are going to remove him from office in any way possible. Very scary.

      Liked by 4 people

      • Paul Vincent Zecchino says:

        Concur. Completely. These communist rats are cunning, well schooled, practiced, and they mean business.

        Exactly as you say, they will use any means necessary – any means, anything – to gain their evil ends.

        They’re not doing this to posture. They’re doing it for the specific purpose of removing first President Trump, and next, Vice President Pence. Once Pelosi is sworn in as President, they will come for every American who is not on their satanic team.

        Liked by 4 people

        • inspectorudy says:

          It isn’t the troll we saw during the impeachment fiasco. It is Lawfare, a group of high priced lawyers who took the Constitution apart and found the areas that were clearly defined. Now they are going to try a hail Mary to see if some obozo judge will ok it. No matter who they choose, it is going to SCOTUS.

          Liked by 4 people

        • LafnH20 says:

          “He’s making his first mistake.

          It’s not a mistake.
          They don’t make mistakes. They don’t do random.
          There’s always an objective.

          Always a target.

          Bourne Supremecy quote.

          Liked by 1 person

      • Your Tour Guide says:

        Verrrryyyyyy old trick. Even at local levels. You should see
        the amount of “public bond issuance” meetings at the local
        courts here in Georgia. Absolutely packed to the gills, many
        with ‘interesting” appraisals.

        Look for legal notices, then observe that all the action occurs
        on Thanksgiving and Christmas Eve. These bastards know when
        the unwashed are busy, and act accordingly.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Magabear says:

        I agree with Rush that we give way too much credit to these people for how smart they are. They get away with alot because they own the media and use that to their advantage, but they also get away with so much due to our side playing nice and being afraid of the media. Hopefully that’s starting to change.

        Liked by 1 person

        • CountryClassVulgarian says:

          “They get away with alot because they own the media and use that to their advantage, but they also get away with so much due to our side playing nice and being afraid of the media. Hopefully that’s starting to change.”

          They also get away with so much because our side are masters of loser think. We talk about these people as though they are all powerful, inevitable, unbeatable. We criticize and constantly throw our own not just under the bus but straight up over the cliff. We talk
          and act like they are so smart and we are a bunch of dweebs getting rolled by them on a daily basis……

          Liked by 1 person

          • yucki says:

            For sure, CountryCV.
            We default to whining loser-think or Stockholm Syndrome.
            PTrump must inspire our side to ditch defeatism, teach us the power of positive thinking. That’s what he repeats in his rallys: We will win, win, win.


        • Kay Sadeeya says:

          @Magabear. Very interesting comment. I just saw something though online about Trump vs. Obama ratings at this time in presidency. Trump is higher than Obama and the article said; “and Obama enjoyed a 95% positive support from the media, and Trump is attacked 95% of the time by the media. think about that.” I thought the thing the media is trying to accomplish; tearing down and defeating Trump in the public’s eye, they’re failing bigly, but they don’t know how to quit. Just think if Trump even received 50% favorability from the media, where would his numbers be then? Keep it up MAGAs; it’s working and winning is fun.

          Liked by 5 people

    • MrBlue says:

      Legal action takes forever and their final deadline is clearly the 2020 election. Just like we didn’t quite know about the McGahn Mueller 6e material (hat tip Sundance), they undoubtedly have a schedule that includes more material they think they can use against Trump if they can win a few legal arguments.

      Liked by 1 person

    • As a man thinkth says:

      UNFORTUNATELY, These idiots have managed to keep Crooked Hillary out of jail, Corrupt FISA to spy on PDJT, charge Genersl Flynn, Hide Wieners laptop, Install Muiller as Special Council, take the House, and file Impeachment against PDJT…
      ALL this in broad daylight, using taxpayer dollars to pay Lawfare to destroy the constitution…
      as far as I can tell, they have never raised a question or issue that they did not already know the answer or assure the outcome…
      In this Impeachment case, it has always been about gaining access to the Muiller/grad jury info…Lawfare already knows whats inside the files and how to use this information to construct the case against PDJT…

      I suspect the courts are rigged to assure access to the grad jury files…eventually

      Liked by 3 people

      • BoreMole says:

        What I am confused by is why they even need this step for access to the grand jury data. For years, they have had no qualms and rightly expected no repercussions whatsoever to passing it to whoever they wish, and leaking it to kingdom come. Whats the likelihood that a grand jury full of DC cockroaches didn’t have at least a few members fully willing to backdoor this stuff? The best part about that is they could cherry pick it like they’ve done already, instead of us unwashed plebes getting to read the whole thing in context.


        • frances says:

          Could it be because they have already gone through all of the grand jury info they are asking for (Mueller or one of his minions could have easily given them the Grand Jury info) know there isn’t anything. We would probably have already seen leaks if there was anything there. So IMO what they are going for is a refusal so they can say, “Behold, the proof of his “Obstruction.”” As for the attorney deposition, I think any court would tell them to take a hike. Which again will be labeled as “Obstruction.”


      • Pale rider says:

        A serious question, who is more dangerous, these traitors or osama bin laden? We had fun with bin laden, just saying. I seriously don’t want a civil war.


        • LafnH20 says:

          They are “Riding the Tiger”, Pale rider 😉

          Riding the tiger is a proverb whose meaning is that the only place where you cannot be eaten by a tiger is when you’re riding it.

          Glorious. Exciting. Feelings of Grandeur are running wild.

          Riding the “Tiger” is one thing..

          Getting off the “Tiger”…

          A whole nuther.

          Liked by 2 people

    • ezgoer says:

      The lower courts are all politically corrupt. Everything will need to be decided by SCOTUS. That will come down to 5-4 decisions with unreliable Justice Roberts as the swing vote.


    • Rachel Guess says:


      The shampeachment:
      1. was ‘so urgent’ that they waited until after their Thanksgiving break to pursue it so it wouldn’t interfere with their planned vacations,
      2. it was ‘so urgent’ that they couldn’t wait on judicial rulings on the issues,
      3. it was ‘so urgent’ that it had to be voted on before the Christmas break so the liberals wouldn’t have to face their constituents before the vote, and
      4. it was ‘so urgent’ that they had to prevent the Senate from receiving the articles fromthe House to hold a trial by withholding the articles of their shampeachment.
      *Note: Just the fact that plastic nan invited President Trump to give his state of the union address on the House floor in February after their vote shows that this entire process has been nothing more than a FARCE while wasting the taxpayers time on the taxpayers dime.

      The precedents established by the current shampeachment of President Trump are:
      1. Completely partisan votes for impeachment based on partisan dislike alone.
      2. Illegal surveillance is legal as long as leftists claim that it is ‘necessary’ to thwart their opponents.
      3. Closed door ‘star chamber’ trials will be held in secret basement hearings in the House. Hearsay/gossip should always be allowed when it supports the leftist agenda. No opportunity shall be allowed for any opposing views via witnesses or evidence that does not promote the leftist agenda or policies, and no information on any opposing viewpoints shall be allowed to be released to the public.
      4. Impeachments can be based on having NO witnesses to any wrongdoing, NO evidence, and NO crimes being specified in the articles in direct violation of the US Constitution.
      5. The judicial branch of the US government has been disenfranchised by leftists and the ‘separate but equal’ clause only applies when it empowers leftist policies or agendas.
      6. The House speaker alone now has total control over both Houses of Congress and is entitled to dictate operational procedures to the Senate.

      This is without a doubt the biggest FARCE in US history, perpetrated by leftists against the voting public and a sitting US President for doing his job in complying with the requirements of US treaties with foreign nations.


  3. Sporty says:

    We must impeach him to find out what is in it.

    Liked by 4 people

  4. Rose says:

    This blog’s author nailed it, they are abusing the legal system hoping the just-us system will provide evidence they can use against Trump via their fake impeachment. They are abusing the courts hoping to find anything they can use against Trump, it’s a gross abuse of the just-us system. It’s bad enough the filth that corrupted the FBI, CIA and justice system-are using the judicial system for the same corrupt purposes. When you can abuse the courts in an effort to gather evidence, it’s suppose to be the other way around, you know the stench of corruption has reached hazmat levels.

    Liked by 14 people

    • Mr e-man says:

      Yet, every single Democrat joined in on the scam, and every single employee from the left wing media joined in on the scam.

      The only one being held accountable is Trump and his supporters. And we have no real options to stop it. That’s wrong.

      I think Nunes strategy to sue everyone is a good start. Let them defend themselves.

      Liked by 7 people

    • LafnH20 says:

      Kinda like FISA!!

      They’ve been doing this sooooooo long..

      They EXPECT the JUDICIARY, et al., to “Halp” them.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Arlo Price says:

      For some strange reason I’m thinkin’ that it’s actually going the way POTUS wants it to go. I believe that spll dhimicrat unlawfare will get turned away in trying to get evidence AFTER the indictment. And that their whole shampeachment is going to backfire greatly bigly……just a hunch😉🇺🇲


  5. Mike says:

    They already have it…trying secure judicial blessing to use it.


  6. Gary Lacey says:

    Is CJ Roberts waiting in the wings…….to declare its a tax and McGahn must testify?

    Liked by 6 people

  7. Give them nothing, appeal it to death. Scorched Earth all the way. Hopefully, half these lefty Tribe clowns will be locked up or under indictment from Barr/Durham. But again, GIVE THEM NOTHING!!!

    Liked by 5 people

    • I like your attitude about “give them nothing”…but go one better.

      Take the fight to them…act with dispatch and end this farce NOW. Go all the way NOW!

      Articles were voted on and passed by the House, so now they are done —out of the picture. Finis.
      House is a big fat zero now.

      Time is of the essence and the Senate must act now and put an end to this abysmal charade. The Senate is now in charge…and they should not give up anything. This is no time for gentle courteous behavior. This should be politics of the 1st degree. Primed and ready to vote for aquital.

      I hope the President understands it is not prudent to play with the enemy. For such they are.

      Instead, for the country’s sake, unrighteousness shown during the Impeachment Inquiry needs to be remembered and answered in full.

      Give no quarter. Let them pound sand.
      God help us in this struggle.

      SCOTUS: No Articles of Impeachment or a Trial Are Required For The Senate to Acquit President Trump

      Liked by 1 person

      • Issy says:

        As much as I would like for Trump to have a trial and expose these scumbags, I don’t think it is wise to mess with these lunatics. There is absolutely no telling what they might do.

        The senate should dismiss as their first order of business on January 7, 2020. This would allow Trump to continue with his agenda and run for reelection. If the senate screws this up, I think they will pay a price.


        • NOET says:

          Regardless of the facts (i.e., the truth), as soon as our ever so statesman-like (statesperson-like?) Republican senators open this can of worms at all, they’ll be inviting the Dark Side to jump in with its Kavanaugh-hearing testimony tactics. No truth. No matter. Damage done.

          What does Nancy call it? The “wrap-up smear”?


        • Rick says:

          “The senate should dismiss as their first order of business on January 7, 2020.”

          This! What the dems did should not be dignified with any response to the phony allegations.

          Mitch should say:
          whereas, the House conducted an impeachment investigation of President Trump with no crime committed;
          whereas the House gave the President no due process, no witnesses, suppressed questions by the republicans, hid exculpatory testimony by the Intelligence OIG; and produced a bipartisan vote against impeachment;
          whereas the articles themselves fail to define an impeachable offense;

          I hereby motion to dismiss.

          Liked by 1 person

  8. bosscook says:

    While we got a heads up when Durham’s investigation would wrap up (early summer), I personally think it will drop much earlier. Why would Barr telegraph the timeline to these criminal liars? I’d want them back on their heels when indictments hit . And the “impeachment” rush, sloppiness, chaos, and Pelosi’s incoherent panic speaks to the Dems belief they probably expect it earlier as well. Just my 2 cents.

    Liked by 4 people

    • olddog35 says:

      Very well could see movement soon, as I recall that Barr stated that we would see the “high water mark”, (something to that effect), by late spring or early summer.

      Hopefully we are nearing the end of low slack.


    • trapper says:

      “Why would Barr telegraph the timeline to these criminal liars?”

      To panic some into coming in and singing. Everyone knows that the first ones in get the deals. All the rest do time.

      Liked by 2 people

  9. darklich123 says:

    The real important question is this: Who is sending this information to ALL his closest aides? Who i sending this imformation to RUSH to HANNITY to LEVIN, etc. Blast this everywhere guys, signal boost this information now or watch these slimy lawyers continue to destroy our beloved country.


  10. Mr e-man says:

    They already have the oppo research. It was absolutely leaked to the media and Congresscritters to use against Trump in 2020.

    The issue is they are trying to use it overtly, instead of just covertly. They must have a legal waiver to do so.

    Liked by 5 people

  11. berniekopell says:

    This is the panel of judges for oral argument:

    Friday, January 3, 2020 9:30 A.M. USCA Courtroom 31 – Judges Henderson, Rogers, Griffith
    19-5331 Committee on the Judiciary v. Donald McGahn, II 15 minutes per side


    • starfcker says:

      That’s actually good. One appointee from each Bush, and one Clinton. Not an Obama judge to be found

      Liked by 1 person

    • litlbit2 says:

      So we are about to see how many more Judges(?) can be exposed as the south end of a north democrat logo!

      A fake scam based on made up fake evidence voted on by the fakers who do not come to a legal decision without the courage to send their shoddy workmanship to the Senate hoping more corrupt judges and Kangaroo courts can expand the process for future congresses and legally elected Presidents! Only from DNC and GOPe types collecting taxpayer funds while trying desperately overthrow the legal American Citizens.

      Very sick people, may all receive their just rewards also extended to all their family members.

      Liked by 2 people

  12. freespeechfanatic says:

    Interesting how everything is always on their terms. Their demands, our responses. Their attacks, our defensives. Over and over again. Majority, minorty, it doesn’t matter.

    Liked by 3 people

  13. zimbalistjunior says:

    Havent read this garbage but on first glance it appears that the lawfare geniuses erred here– by not including some of the obstruction crap from Mueller Report as part of impeachment articles. Should have included some McGahn related crap (if it exists or heck, make it up) and included it in a broad obstruction of justice article. Then they could at least allege some relevancy.
    this attempt is far too attenuated.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Rob says:

      They said they will impeach again or add to existing, so it’s not too late according to them.


    • Kay Sadeeya says:

      @zimblistjunior. Interesting, yet they didn’t charge “obstruction of justice”, which would possible have been a “high crime”, they charged obstruction of congress, for refusing to cooperate with the witch-hunt kangaroo one-sided investigation. The question is why? Why wouldn’t they go for a more serious charge, like they tried with; “treason” or “bribery” as they evolved throughout the spectacle? They either don’t have anything and are just trying to keep the radical socialists in their party from coming after them, or they are trying to push it through and when it fails, accuse the Senate of refusing to give them justice and get their fellow Demobcrats into the streets for a little civil unrest and building destruction, to bring on CWII.


      • frances says:

        I think this is a dogs breakfast, they created a “crime” and tried to use their fictional crime to find something, anything. Came up dry, so fabricated charges and rushed it through to placate their mob back home. They expect the DOJ to refuse their requests and to then use the refusals as proof that there is a DOJ/Trump obstruction of Justice. They then can call for Barr to be sidelined because of bias and when the Senate tells them to take a hike they will use that to fundraise to take the Senate. Just a guess.


  14. TMonroe says:

    What’s next? “We need NSA files on everyone because we think they did something wrong and we want evidence of it. Crime shopping Soviet-style…

    Liked by 4 people

  15. trapper says:

    God, I love this country. Rest Of The World, pay attention. Take notes. THIS is how it is done in the country with the government that is the pinnacle of freedom and civility, Western Civilization broke free from its historic snares. THIS is how it is done in America.

    You are witnessing the latest skirmish in America’s 21st Century civil war. It is playing out before your eyes. We don’t send armed partisans to battle on the barricades. We send lawyers to battle in court. Pay attention. It will not wait for you to keep up. Blink and you will miss it. Most will.

    Liked by 3 people

  16. Della, get Paul Drake on the phone…….

    Liked by 1 person

  17. starfcker says:

    The lawfare argument is so absurd because it completely destroys our legal system. Innocent until proven guilty. They have shown no reservations in deestroying attorney-client privilege in the Michael Cohen case, and now they’re putting executive privilege on trial as well. No dirtbags, you don’t get to use every word ever uttered by a human being to remove a good man from office. This idea seem to take root when the shadowing operation for George Allen snared him in the macaca moment. President Trump has certainly not bowed to anything of the sort. I think this idea dies right here in the DC Circuit Court.

    Liked by 4 people

  18. Rick says:

    Because the articles of impeachment fail to demonstrate an impeachable offense, and because the impeachment inquiry by the House failed to execute due process and whose behavior and actions were in fact a gross abuse of power in their drive to discover a crime, therefore the motion to compel is denied.

    Liked by 2 people

  19. Ironclaw says:

    Seems to me that since they already moved forward without it, they’ve as much as admitted that they did NOT need it.

    Liked by 3 people

  20. LafnH20 says:

    Lack of Jurisdiction… 🤔

    …. ‘a way for House lawyers to argue in court all of the constitutionally contended material is required as evidence for pending judicial proceedings, a trial in the Senate.’

    House lawyers… 🤔

    Senate Trial… 🤔

    Does the House have to obtain the
    (6e and McGahn) material and THEN GIVE it to the Senate? 🤔

    Can’t the SENATE do this on It’s OWN if it so Orders? 🤔

    Is The SENATE INEPT or something?
    Can they NOT BE TRUSTED!

    Does SanFran Poop-nan Run the SENATE and the JUDICIARY, TOO?
    Do ‘We the PEOPLE’ have but ONE Branch of Government?…

    The Democrat branch??
    Not much of a ‘Tree of Liberty’…
    Having but one branch and all.

    Is SanFranPoop-nan running the Whole DAMNED Government??

    Once again, SanFranPoop-nan, nadless and their Flying Monkeys are trying to mix up the eloquently aligned puzzle pieces that make up OUR CONSTITUTION by cutting, whitewashing and pasting them into a collage of Slander, Innuendo and False Pretense to meet their own needs; and then expecting EVERYONE to believe it’s Still the CONSTITUTION…
    Underneath the Balserdash and whitewash.. Dontcha know.

    These people are NOT Americans, imho.
    These people DO NOT Represent ‘We the PEOPLE’.

    These people represent themselves and THEIR INTERESTS.

    These people are POSSESSED!!

    Liked by 2 people

  21. Deplorable Canuck says:

    Fox is only now catching up to what Sundance wrote about almost a week ago. Why are these idiots not reading your posts Sundance? You are obviously two steps in front of everybody.

    Liked by 1 person

  22. jeans2nd says:

    Brett Hume has made the 6e/Don McGahn/shampeachment connection, although not the oppo research angle. But Hume did make the connection, and a handful few million heard him.

    Hume believes the Socialist democrats are after evidence, any evidence, to shore up their non-existing evidence they currently possess, in order to flip any Republican, House or Senate, to vote for shampeachment. Iow, going for the PR value.

    And we all know Fox is doing all in their power to assist the Socialist democrats in their quest.

    Hume also appears to believe McConnell holds all the cards, and credits McConnell for possibly cancelling the shampeachment for lack of prosecution.

    Liked by 2 people

  23. trumpmemesandreams says:

    Considering this is before U.S. District Court Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson [Obama was vetting her for SCOTUS] it’s a pretty safe assumption she’s going to go with her left-progressive party tendencies and allow Democrats to get access to whatever they please.

    When the DOJ argued before Ketanji that — No, a mere judge should NOT be able to single-handedly stop a lawful exercise of Constitutional powers (also codified in existing statutory law) by POTUS, but instead the court ought to constrain itself to the individuals seeking relief versus sweeping nation-wide injunctions — her response was telling.
    “It reeks of bad faith, demonstrates contempt for the authority that the Constitution’s Framers have vested in the judicial branch, and, ultimately, deprives successful plaintiffs of the full measure of the remedy to which they are entitled.”

    She’s the definition of an activist judge. I expect this will be appealed all the way to SCOTUS, too.

    Liked by 3 people

    • WES says:

      Trump:. A while back Ristvan speculated that all 3 cases would likely end up with SCOTUS.

      If Ristvan is right, then he probably allowed for the fact that the DC Fed court judge’s would apply the Mamet Principles, as SD so nicely put it, to their rulings in favor of the Dems.

      So first we lose repeatedly, until we get to SCOTUS where we have a fair chance of winning at least 2 out of 3 cases, maybe even all 3 cases.

      Just my guess. If we win the tax case and the Mueller grand jury evidence case, then the legal rug is pulled out from under the Dem’s impeachment articles.

      The only thing I don’t know is whether the Dems will pay any attention! The law has never seemed to stop them before!

      Like many, I suspect they will simple carry on as if nothing happened! Again the Mamet Principles hard at work!

      Liked by 1 person

  24. Nigella says:

    McGahn is no friend of the Presidents


  25. NOET says:

    If all of this isn’t mind numbing enough, I’ve just had another idea slap me in the face. We taxpayers are not only paying these Lawfare guerillas to attack our country now—we are also paying them to launch their future political careers and return to the battlefield 20 years from now:

    — Senate Majority Leader: Daniel Goldman?
    — Senate Intelligence Committee Chair: Norm Eisen?
    — House Judiciary Committee Chair: Barry Berke?

    (The more senior Douglas Letter may hold out for a SCOTUS nomination.)

    I can just see them now on the CNN (Communist News Network): “Hmm, yes, Dana, I do know a thing or two about the impeachment process. Yes, Dana, I was involved in the 2019-2020 Trump impeachment. . . .”

    Liked by 1 person

    • California Joe says:

      Looks more like The Knesset! LOL


    • Kay Sadeeya says:

      @NOET. …except for one thing, if everything goes according to plan and schedule; everyone of these coup plotters and seditious scoundrels will be long gone dead and rotting in the ground, before the next time a Democrat is elected president; even the youthful Strozk and the fetching Ms. Lisa Page. I can wish can’t I?


    • As a man thinkth says:

      We pay the Lawfare training centers as University professors and state prosecutors office…then they graduate to a federal job Washington DC…

      They live on tax payer dollars all of their lives…hell, we even pay to bury them…


  26. youme says:

    Josh Blackman:

    “First, DOJ contends that the case is not moot. The subpoena was premised on the House’s oversight and legislative powers, apart from its impeachment powers. More importantly, DOJ contends that the Court no longer needs to decide if “the subpoena was ever validly justified by the House’s impeachment power in the first place.”

    Second, DOJ explains that the impeachment vote does have one immediate implication: the proceedings should slow down. In short, the House has already voted on its articles of impeachment. Therefore, expedited consideration of this subpoena is no longer necessary. DOJ strongly suggests that the House’s impeachment investigation is over.

    Third, DOJ argues that the Committee’s “primary justification to sue no longer exists.” That is, the need to facilitate the impeachment inquiry process. Again, the House will likely contend that the impeachment inquiry into Mueller and obstruction continues, without regard to the two approved Articles.

    Fourth, DOJ contends that obstruction of congress article does implicate the district court’s opinion, which was premised on obstruction of justice.

    This argument creates potential recusal issues for Chief Justice Roberts.


  27. John Obidienzo says:


    “No, no!” said the Queen. “Sentence first–verdict afterward.”
    “No, no!” said the Speaker “Impeachment first–evidence afterward.”

    It worked that way in Wonderland. They knew the Court would likely uphold executive privilege if they ran the impeachment legitimately through the HJC. Instead, they got their impeachment first by running it through the HIC where the President was denied ‘due process’ and other rights during an unconstitutionally butchered Inquiry.

    The Very Stable Genius now stands impeached under unconstitutional articles, denied his sixth Amendmant right to a speedy trial while the speaker delays the Senate in anticipation of enlisting the Court to produce evidence she perceived unattainable without first holding the formal impeachment to exhibit for the Court. If the impeachment is on exhibit for the Court is it not also on exhibit to the Senate.

    “The resolution passed. It was resolved that the President “is impeached” and that the articles be “exhibited” to the Senate.  The first objective was accomplished when the resolution passed, and the second objective has not yet been accomplished.”

    “But formal transmission of the articles is not required by the Constitution for there to be an impeachment.”

    Feldman must be working with Tribe.

    You don’t offer tyrants comity and distinction by having a trial over their tossed garbage. You slam them down hard, dismissed! Clear the stink from the Capitol!

    Liked by 1 person

    • But also …“is it Constitutionally sufficient that the House merely declares: “the President is impeached?”

      Unfortunately for the Democrats and their overpaid-yet-inept lawyers, the answer is “No.”

      If we were in England, the President could be kicked out for “maladministration,” which roughly translates to: “you serve at our pleasure, and we just don’t like you anymore.” But our Founders instead demanded a crime: something for which the accused would face “indictment, trial, conviction, and punishment” in an actual Court. No such thing exists. The Court is not the slightest bit interested in this man.

      And then – “attainder.” Expressly prohibited. The Legislature may not declare that a person is guilty and then punish him for the same (by impeachment …) without a trial. And, the fact that a person is impeached carries no criminal implication.

      “Sorry, Lawfare …” In the many hundreds of years of history of which our Founders were aware, what you are attempting to do is nothing new.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Issy says:

        Very eloquent and would make a great summation speech for a jury. I don’t know about the judges. I sometimes wonder if all common sense has been legalized out of them by all the codes and statutes they follow.


        • zorrorides says:

          Mitch, toss a grenade into the lawfare Dems.

          “This ‘thing’ the House made meets none of the Constitutional requirements for Impeachment. For acts undefined, and without crimes mentioned, the Articles seek to deprive a citizen of the office he won in lawful election and deprives the millions of citizens the lawful result of their votes. It is a Bill of Attainder.

          “The Constitution expressly forbids Congress to do this. The Senate declares the House has gone rogue in this matter, and it must cease these activities. The Senate will accept only honorable, fair and Constitutional actions from the House. This impeachment action is rebuked and rejected because it is unconstitutional.”

          Liked by 1 person

  28. MDNA I says:

    Others may know more & I hope they weigh in. My ‘gut’ response is that the DOJ’s argument is stronger. Bringing the impeachment inquiry into it was a risk, but now that Articles have been voted on & adopted, this appears to me to be outside the courts’ jurisdiction. It’s now a political question.

    My understanding, the reason more briefs were called for in the 1st place was standing. Which for any number of reasons it’s fair to wonder why the House is harmed when Barr offered to let Congress view 6(e) material under his people’s supervision, on his turf, w/ his security protocols in place, subject to his discretion. No. They want it all in the public bloodstream to disseminate (obviously).


  29. Merkin Muffley says:

    Haven’t the Democrats been claiming this for abut 6 weeks now?


  30. Hans says:

    I’ll try a long Hail Mary here.
    If the SC rules for PDT then the Democrats will use it as a reason to expand the SC to 11 or 15 members in the 2020 campaign.


  31. 335blues says:

    “Remember, the Mueller evidence was gathered during a counterintelligence investigation…”
    Also please remember the investigation cited above came as the result of a failed coup d’etat
    involving illegal FISA warrants, perjury and spying on a President.
    Nothing collected during any of these false and illegal investigations should be admissible in court.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Issy says:

      This would be the way a normal person would see it, although I don’t think there has been any official statement the warrants were illegal. We get the usual, mistakes made, procedures not followed etc.

      I know very little about the law, obviously, but it seems to me the political process of impeachment is being legalized to death. Heck, I thought it was about the Ukraine phone call.


  32. Kelly says:

    It seems to me that this case should be dismissed simply because the constitutionally the House and all its committees lack standing to request documents/testimony since the Senate sets the rules for the trial.

    Liked by 1 person

  33. The American Patriot says:

    This isn’t going to go the way the Demosocialistscrats wants to go.

    Those lawyers should be automatically DISBARRED!


  34. tod says:

    I would agree with Rush, they are Not that smart! If they were they would not need the media. Democrat voters would not be turning and the evidence would have been produced and Pres. Trump would already be gone!

    It does not work in the commy bastards favor to drag it on and on and on.

    There are way too many who give these traitorous murdering bastards too much credit! Reminds me of so many Christians that credit the devil for all the bad/evil in the world. Satan and his disciples (Democrats) are not all powerful and are not all knowing!

    Trust in God but keep the powder dry.


  35. CountryClassVulgarian says:

    So let me get this straight. The argument is “Your honor we impeached the sumbitch we got no evidence. But if you let us take a swing at his top counsel by the time we are done threatening him we’ll show you the evidence of his crimes “?

    Liked by 1 person

  36. Kay Sadeeya says:

    To see what the Democrats are afraid of look where they direct their attacking missiles:

    #1 – Rudy Guilliani. His uncovering of the Ukrainian corrupt slush fund the darling children of our Democrat officials role in tending to it always seems to draw their attention, especially as they try and discredit him.

    #2 -The Impeachment trial going to the Senate. What an actual trial, with both sides participating, might uncover if everything is exposed must be keeping the Democrats and those with much to hide up at night in cold sweats, especially with the pit-bull Guilliani on the scent. So Pelosi and the Democrats want to control the trial through court orders and regulations; and if we are not careful they will, unless we have some RepublicanSenators with back bones.

    #3 The 2020 election. This might be just an attempt to run out the clock and the continuation to keep impeachment hanging over Trump’s head leading into November next year. They are probably hoping they will have enough low-information and illegal voters to pull off the impossible: A Democrat president without a viable candidate.


    • Publius Syrus says:

      And today the NYT launches a “shoot the messenger” Narrative against Durham,
      Having had First ever AG cited for contempt, aka “I’m offended and refuse to answer because raaaacisss” Eric Holder write an op ed calling Barr corrupt.

      Obama is getting pretty scared, methinks…the slimetails all lead back to him, even if the Progressive Propaganda Presstitutes try to censor and throw up FUD.


  37. Joshua2415 says:

    Leaving the Mueller GJ material question aside for the moment, even if the court denies the justice departments claim of “Executive Privilege”, shouldn’t McGahn be protected from answering questions about VSGPDJT based on “Attorney-Client Privilege”? He was the President’s attorney after all.

    Liked by 1 person

  38. dufrst says:

    I know a lot of Trump voters love their local representative. But it’s time to set that aside for the good of the republic. If that representative is not GOP, you have to vote them out. It’s not personal to that representative and it may not be fair, but these are the cards that have been dealt. Many may assume the 2020 election is between Trump and the Dem nominee. I will argue that with Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi’s relentlessness on impeachment, as outline by Sundance, this election more arguably between Trump and the House Leadership. The Dem nominee has become a bystander to the real action in Washington. Once Pelosi (along with Schiff) took the route of impeachment, she made herself the most visible and relevant opposition candidate in 2020 to Donald Trump. With that in mind, it’s imperative that every person who votes for Trump carry that vote through the GOP ticket to affect the leadership of the House, because if the Dems retain control, they will continue to seek to remove the President from office.

    The Senate is also vital and it hangs like a loose tooth (to borrow a phrase from Michael Savage)! The GOP only hold a three majority, with exactly three vulnerable incumbents in CO, AZ, and ME. Trump did yeoman’s work to ensure the Dems did not take the Senate in 2018. He will have to do doubly this time. Schumer is run by Pelosi, full stop. He will do her bidding and if somehow he gets control, you can bet your life, they will look to remove the president from office in-spite of his reelection. They have no regard for elections anymore. This is about power and they are willing to break every norm and stretch any precedent in order to achieve the ends, no matter the means!

    So when you get behind that booth Nov 2020, think Trump/Pence vs Pelosi/Schiff, not whoever the Dems end up nominating. That person was made irrelevant once Pelosi got the articles of impeachment passed. Pelosi/Schiff must be defeated and that means you have to vote against your favorite representative.

    Liked by 3 people

  39. Eric Anderson says:

    So since an impeachment never expires and can be taken up by the senate in the next congress, is the strategy of the Dems in the house to attempt to keep the impeachment articles in the house till the election and then go for broke hoping to take control of the senate so they can finish out the impeachment there? They know they are going to lose the house big, but the senate is another animal altogether.


    • bluenova1971 says:

      I don’t think that an “impeachment never expires”…

      If this Congress doesn’t send the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate by the time this Congressional (House) term expires, I think the Articles expire along with the current term, if what I’ve read is correct.


  40. Troublemaker10 says:


  41. JohnCasper says:

    The plain fact is that the mental structure of today’s democrat politician is a joke in itself: a flat, crude, unanswerable disproof of any nonsense about them having any intelligence or sanity left. Their speaking and eliminating functions were obviously wired together in hell by some subcommittee that was giggling cruelly as it went about its work.
    ht: CH


  42. ezgoer says:

    Pelosi will never send the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate. This is all a ploy to try to get the Mueller grand jury testimony unsealed to see if they can get more damning articles passed or at least use it as oppo research for dirt in the 2020 campaign. Nancy won’t allow the Senate to acquit so she never sends the current articles.


  43. rayvandune says:

    Mitch needs to say: “Every day the House refuses to deliver to the Senate the articles of impeachment it has passed, is a day it further corrupts an already unjust process, and further solidifies the perception within the Senate, and the country at large, that this is a shameful, dangerous, and illegal political stunt, hatched to prevent the Department of Justice from holding to account many criminals, and among them many of you are to be found!”


  44. Hmmmm…
    Since the House has ALREADY impeached the President for “Abuse of Power” how can they need/utilize MORE evidence (Mcgahn’s” testimony) in order to impeach him for “Abuse of Power”?

    Either this notion is an admission that their impeachment vote was premature and I’ll advised, or they’re lying about WHY the want Mcgahn to testify. (Actually, BOTH apply here)


  45. ChampagneReady says:

    If I were them, I would take not that 22% of DEMOCRATS are now supporting Trump. Poll just released Monday and taken AFTER all impeachment hearings.

    If that doesn’t register and you’re a democrat, you’re a special kind of stupid.


  46. L&L says:

    Do you get see or use grand jury material if it contains any connection to an illegal FISA surveillance?

    Can’t DOJ argue the 6(e) material and anything McGahn might say about the Russia investigation or Mueller should await the outcome of Durham’s investigation? All that information stems from an illegal spying operation that is under investigation.

    Don’t the victims of an illegal spying operation have any rights?

    Liked by 1 person

  47. Sean Supsky says:

    This is more evidence of wrong-doing by the evilcrats.

    We know it is,

    They know it is.

    The rest of the world knows it is.

    Able to be introduced as evidence in the future against the dems, the coup plotters, the previous admin.

    Don’t restrict your thinking to the present, rather look at the bigger picture, and know that God is in control.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s