Anticipate House Impeachment Articles After January 3rd, 2020 – Oral Arguments for Mueller Grand Jury Material…

Oral arguments in the DC Court of Appeals for the House Judiciary Committee to obtain Mueller’s grand jury information, are scheduled for January 3rd, 2020.  The HJC is leveraging the Senate impeachment trial in their arguments to gain access to the Mueller material. This approach is by design.

With that in mind it seems likely any House impeachment articles will not be delivered to the Senate until after the DC court arguments, and likely not before the ruling:

[HJC -vs- DOJ full brief link here]

In addition to the Mueller evidence, the HJC is seeking judicial enforcement authority to force the testimony of former White House counsel Don McGahn.  Both HJC appeals court arguments are using the Senate trial to bolster their case.

The rushed House articles were/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 could facilitate two pending court cases.

As interested observers will note the House never voted to authorize the full judicial impeachment process; instead they voted to approve an inquiry into whether an impeachment should take place.  By not voting to authorize articles of impeachment the House never gainedjudicial enforcement authority‘.

What the house crew have assembled is an interesting back-door attempt to position a valid claim for evidence against the accused without having first gained judicial authority for it. The HJC is now arguing to appeals courts, and likely to SCOTUS, the blocked evidentiary material is critical evidence in a soon-to-be-held Senate trial.

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. [The supreme court will hear financials/taxes in April].

House counsel Doug Letter responded to the DC Appeals Court arguing the forced testimony of White House counsel Don McGahn is needed for evidence in the impeachment trial. [Court pdf Avail Here] And the grand jury material is needed to highlight the second article, Obstruction of Congress [Court pdf Avail Here]

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.

The oral arguments are next Friday, January 3rd, 2020.

Full HJC Brief Here

Full DOJ Response Brief Here

 

This entry was posted in AG Bill Barr, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Cold Anger, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, Election 2020, Impeachment, Legislation, media bias, Nancy Pelosi, Notorious Liars, President Trump. Bookmark the permalink.

265 Responses to Anticipate House Impeachment Articles After January 3rd, 2020 – Oral Arguments for Mueller Grand Jury Material…

  1. James Groome says:

    Seems to me the argument is THAT some if not all of the material may be FRUIT OF THE POISONED TREE… meaning anything from the PAGE FISA and ALL OF THE TWO HOPS were ILLEGALLY OBTAINED and therefore should all be shredded and disposed of as though it never occurred.

    Liked by 34 people

    • WES says:

      James:. When you are a Dem, the law does not apply to you! It only applies to everyone else!

      Liked by 12 people

      • litlbit2 says:

        Seems to date the DNC/GOPe have successfully made a mockery of the FISA and its Judges, the House of Representatives, DOJ, FBI, HJC, MSM, Gang of Eight, why would they stop before doing the same for Roberts or selected Supreme’s and McConnell’s leadership?

        Do not know about AG Barr(w/Bush luggage) but would think the load being carried by Durham is getting very heavy. He appears to be practically the only one in Justice actually performing the job he hired on to fulfill. Godbless Mr. Durham America’s for ending rampant greed, power and corruption 🙏🙏🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

        Liked by 6 people

        • GB Bari says:

          Point of perspective..

          Back in early 2018 I believe that CTH and most a Treepers were looking forward to IG Horowitz’s reports under the assumption that he was digging into every nook and cranny to find all of the incriminating evidence against the coup conspirators, the FISA abuse, the Hillary crimes, etc.

          When those IG reports finally were made public, they contained much good information, but were disappointingly well short of being comprehensively complete. And while the current AG defends the DOJ & FBI by reciting the list of officials no longer employed or in their previous positions, we have seen no prosecutions as a result of all that effort.

          Trying to keep my eyes wide open, I’m not expecting much different from Durham, despite the significantly different role in which he is acting and his different powers and authorities. Hope I am pleasantly surprised.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

            CTH and most a Treepers were looking forward to IG Horowitz’s reports under the assumption that he was digging into every nook and cranny….

            This is the problem with imposing a set of expectations and assumptions where they have no merit then complaining about the result of your expectations not being met.
            So if anyone is disappointed that Horowitz didn’t dig up e.g. “Hillary’s crimes” it’s their own fault for thinking he would in the first place.
            The DOG IG has very limited authority and specifically described exactly what he was looking at in his reviews.
            eg: Comey told him to “stick it” when it came to reinstating his security clearance limiting Comey’s usefulness at all
            (Horowitz actually lobbied Senate in his testimonies for subpoena power like the DoD IG already has…so he can “stick it” back in the future)
            When he found a significantly related offshoot path….he created a separate report.
            When he found documentary evidence of a crime….he referred it.
            but mostly stayed in the lane he said all along he was going to stay in.

            This is precisely why Barr appointed his “special counsel” Durham months ago.

            And described it- amongst other places-here:
            https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6145785/6-10-19-DOJ-Letter-Durham-Review.pdf

            Ironically……for the past 8 months….CTH Treepers have done the same thing again…..ONLY IN REVERSE

            Barr appoints Durham–A PROSECUTOR– to look in all those “nooks and crannies” that Horowitz didn’t
            BECAUSE HE COULDN’T
            and somehow…..
            Barr is doing NOTHING.

            SD need only post that pic of Bagpipe Bill….and watch the comments section light up with
            triggered treepers. Pavlovian.

            BTW
            You missed a couple of the other things the current AG has said…recently.

            Horowitz didn’t have all the info available to him to make a “finding” on predication.
            (Durham said that too btw)
            The FBI’s entire Crossfire Hurricane case collapsed in January 2017 (uh oh Mueller)
            The errors in the FISA were not just “mistakes”….there was serious misconduct
            James Comey is lying when he says the investigation was several layers below him…in fact it was managed from the top.

            It appears he doesn’t want “public confusion” over false narratives moving forward
            (at least that what he told Pete Williams from NBC)

            For a do nothing…..this guy is awful chatty about the stuff he’s doing.
            Can’t wait to see how the treepers handle Durham.

            Liked by 1 person

            • stripmallgrackle says:

              “So if anyone is disappointed that Horowitz didn’t dig up e.g. “Hillary’s crimes” it’s their own fault for thinking he would in the first place.” It’s the same level of misunderstanding of process that enabled people to wake up thinking Trump was gone (Sorry!!). Treepers, of all people, should have known the limited scope of Horowitz’s investigation.

              Barr is holding his cards very close to the vest. Durham is holding his so close it doesn’t even look like he has a hand. We have no business speculating on what either of them are about to play.

              Liked by 1 person

    • Questioning says:

      Let me see if I understand this…. The Speaker has been ordered by a majority of sitting Representatives to forward the 2 count Impeachment to the Senate; what’s the holdup? Can Nancy really legally defy her own House?

      Like

    • ABN says:

      Even worse it is fruit of a made-up poisonous tree and this same reasoning applies to the entire Mueller investigation. There never was any legitimate basis for it. In fact, those who knowingly pursued these fraudulent investigations should themselves be prosecuted.

      Liked by 8 people

      • bertdilbert says:

        All material gained from the fraud on the court FISA should be off limits.

        Liked by 4 people

        • cantcforest says:

          The entire SC investigation should be forgotten!!!
          For the dimms to be working backwards to get info released is very close to demonstrating that we are no longer a country of laws. Ergo, lawyers are no longer important. Sorry ristvan.

          Liked by 1 person

        • As a man thinkth says:

          Bert…agreed we know all the Muiller investigation was basically a fraud going back to FISA abuse…and the “evidence ” should be considered the poison fruit…QUESTION: What action, and by whom does it take to have this “evidence” sealed, dismissed or destroyed…

          I Would think that BARR(DOJ) has a responsibility to take corrective action…Further, the people perpetrating this fraud. once charged should be held responsible for the cost of the Muiller investigation

          Like

      • Issy says:

        I do believe that is the focus of Mr. Durham.

        Like

    • Hebo Sabe says:

      Speaking historically? Normally they can whip up enough collectivist rinos to their side.

      We shall see.

      Like

    • fhb says:

      true…Mr Groomes

      Like

    • stripmallgrackle says:

      Is there a chance that a strongly worded opinion from the Court might begin with the phrase, “I’m going to take this opportunity to save you from yourselves, and…”?

      Liked by 1 person

  2. SpotTheSpook says:

    Doesn’t the Lawfare clan already have the 6(e) material? Are they just trying to get it legally before they start leaking it?

    Liked by 15 people

    • sundance says:

      I’m pretty certain that Nadler and Co have all of the Mueller 6(e) material already. Yes, Team Weissmann gave it to them for use.

      The problem for the HJC, Fusion GPS and DNC is they need to legally get it to the House so they can start leaking and creating… So, yes.

      Liked by 32 people

      • Tl Howard says:

        If Weissman gave it to them, shouldn’t he be arrested?

        Liked by 6 people

        • California Joe says:

          He should have been arrested for leaking the sealed indictment and arrest v warrant for Roger Stone to CNN. Stone’s lawyer had proof that Weissman leaked the sealed information to a CNN reporter by email. Mueller’s lawyer denied it in court when the judge asked him and the judge dismissed the allegation immediately! Weissman is invincible!

          Liked by 14 people

        • cboldt says:

          Violations of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure Rule 6(e) are not a crime.
          Rule 6. The Grand Jury | Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure

          Like

          • Greg1 says:

            Thank you for the legal help!

            Like

          • California Joe says:

            Violations of Rule 6e are a Contempt of Court misdemeanor punishment is one year in federal prison. I personally know two investigators for the US Department of Labor who inadvertently gave 6e information to another witness and were prosecuted, convicted and sent to prison along with losing their job. So, you’re wrong. It is a crime!

            Like

          • MNcarrypermitholder says:

            I’m going to disagree.

            Much like the statues are compiled from laws, the Federal Rules of Procedure are compiled – but in this case they are compiled from both laws and Supreme Court-issued rules. I dug into it once a while back, and if I recall correctly, 6(e) comes from a law.

            At any rate, regardless of the origin of the rule, if a court thinks that a violation of the rules is important enough for criminal prosecution, they can refer charges. When no specific penalty is specified (which is either always or very close to it), the correct procedure is for the court to find a statute that covers similar behavior in a different context and attach those penalties. In this case, we have no particular shortage of statutes covering the unauthorized release of confidential material in other contexts.

            Like

        • The American Patriot says:

          The arrest and disbarment is coming!

          Like

      • An says:

        I fully agree that they have everything. Wasn’t “Reality Winner” arrested for grabbing some tax data or something?

        I wonder if there’s any way to force an error on their part and get something leaked early?

        Liked by 2 people

      • B Woodward says:

        “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.”

        So the House is admitting that they impeached the President without the evidence that they needed to impeach the President?

        Liked by 11 people

      • vikingmom says:

        The whole point of the Mueller fishing expedition was to find SOMETHING, ANYTHING that could be used to discredit/remove President Trump. They probably found loads of potentially damaging info but were unable to get it into the record because it was so questionable as to its veracity (just like the original Steele dossier) or the release of it would so clearly identify the source who leaked it that they couldn’t take that chance.

        But now, they are getting desperate and the impeachment and subsequent lawsuits for (6e) testimony are their Hail Mary pass because they KNOW they can’t win the election in November with their current crop of candidates (Sorry Slow Joe – you’re a No Go!).

        Sometimes this feels like a incredibly high stakes poker game…President Trump knows the hand he holds but there are a few wild cards out there that he has to factor in – not the least of which is Chief Justice John Roberts, who is clearly compromised but MIGHT still step up and do the right thing (although I wouldn’t put any money on him, TBH).

        Liked by 5 people

    • Niagara Frontier says:

      I was just prepared to ask Sundance the same question. Many of us here are convinced that the 6(e) materials already reside on scores of flash drives in the possession of a few select individuals.

      The same goes for President Trump’s tax returns from the time he first filed as a teenager to the present.

      Liked by 9 people

  3. milktrader says:

    They should find another hobby

    Liked by 8 people

  4. David says:

    Non sequitur

    Like

  5. Simple enough. Barr is going to drop the hammer and blow the whole thing up. Barr knows this is the only way to prevent a constitutional crisis of biblical proportions. A race to the finish line. My money is on Barr because he understands the damage the criminal activity of the Democrats and deep state is doing to the Country. I believe he already has the proof that the whole Russiagate conspiracy was Brennan`s idea and Strozk and others implemented the scam under the direction of Brennan and Comey.

    Liked by 20 people

  6. flyboy51v says:

    Obama or Trump judge? Doesn’t really matter about the merits of the argument. Can it be appealed up to scotus?

    Liked by 2 people

    • Right to reply says:

      I hope so!

      Like

    • sundance says:

      First needs to go en blanc (full appeals panel), then if they lose they can go to SCOTUS for emergency administrative stay.

      Liked by 18 people

      • Joshua2415 says:

        Couldn’t McConnell nix the whole argument by setting a date for opening arguments and declaring that only prosecution “evidence” presented to the House prior to their impeachment vote will be considered by the Senate?

        Liked by 2 people

        • Summer says:

          No date should be set at all because both charges are unconstitutional and therefore unfit to be even considered by the Senate. Setting a date for arguments would legitimize this illegal sham and establish a dangerous precedent.

          NO TRIAL should be held.

          Liked by 5 people

      • Bert Darrell says:

        It’d be better if the appeals court goes en banc.

        Like

        • The President and McConnell needs to send Pelosi a demand letter and sue to declare the articles and their delay unconstitutional.
          But, but… we can’t do that! We were too damn successful with the courts in 2000! The law of averages would just kill us.

          Like

          • And Bush v. Gore and Harris v.Gore were also supposed to be barred by the political question doctrine, and yet two consecutive full blown appellate decisions were decided in a combined total of 31 days.
            Marbury v. Madison? Naaaahh that was 1803.
            The political question doctrine is a pick and chose doctrine that the S.Ct. can waive
            You can’t receive unless you try..

            You can’t receive unless you ask.

            Like

  7. Right to reply says:

    I fail to see how they can LEGALLY acquire any of this. They haven’t even laid out substantiated crimes requiring impeachment.

    Are we going to march, or not?

    Liked by 6 people

  8. Publius2016 says:

    Ex Post Facto!

    Illegal under US Constitutional Law and common law.

    Once again, Dimms are the party of Sharia!

    Liked by 5 people

  9. California Joe says:

    McGann was fired by Trump a year before the Ukraine debacle how does his testimony relate to either of the articles of impeachment which haven’t even been sent to the Senate yet?

    Liked by 12 people

  10. zozz1 says:

    Time for Mitch to ignore all this Dem maneuvering in an attempt to control the Senate and its processes and procedures. Time for Mitch to take charge and to be a leader…and to quit pussyfooting around Pelosi. Is Mitch the Senate leader, or is Pelosi? Time for Mitch to decide. Time for Mitch to ACT!

    Liked by 1 person

  11. joebkonobi says:

    Seems to me that the govt lawyers should at least try and make a case that since the 6(e) material was generated from a counterintelligence investigation that the IG has found to be suspect in the least. There is a strong possibility that the “evidence” was illegally/unethically obtained. Once it is released it cannot be taken back. It would also seem that President Trump was exonerated of any crimes in the Mueller investigation by Mueller not bringing any charges Mueller documenting there was no collusion and Barr and Rosenstein documenting there was no obstruction.

    I also hope the courts see that the dems are making a mockery of the Constitution but I fear the circuit court will likely join them. SC will almost surely take it up.

    Liked by 6 people

    • WES says:

      Joe:. Ristvan indicated these 2 cases would most likely end up before SCOTUS.

      That indirectly implied that President Trump would first lose both cases in the Federal courts simply because Obama judges are the majority.

      Like

      • cboldt says:

        IIRC, ristvan predicted that no matter which side wins, the loser will peteition SCOTUS to take the case. I agree with that prediction. SCOTUS can take it or leave it.
        If the Circuit court decides to pierce the general rule for secrecy, it will do so on very narrow grounds (applies only to POTUS/impeachment) so as to not otherwise disturb precedent. SCOTUS has no interest in preserving any institution other than itself, and is apt to “wave off” a petition, no matter which side brings it.

        Liked by 1 person

    • BitterC says:

      Letting the House Dems rummage thru Mueller’s work files is double jeopardy…not legally, but in spirit

      Liked by 1 person

  12. Bree says:

    Ergo……….

    Like

  13. Elric VIII says:

    The next time President Trump is away from Washington, D.C. nuke it from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.

    Liked by 3 people

  14. FL_GUY says:

    Wow, what a stupid farce. Essentially, the D-Rats have “arrested” President Trump without cause (impeachment) and are now demanding the “evidence” to justify the arrest. This is how a police state works. Everying the D-Rats have done violates every sentence and paragraph of the US Constitution.

    Here is a sobering thought. The D-Rats are trying to pull this under the most honest and successful President the USA has had since George Washington. Can you imagine what HELL we would be in now if the EVIL Hag had managed to steal the election? It would be NAZI Germany all over again with people dragged out of their houses in the middle of the night e.g. Manafort, Stone, except it could be any one of us that disagreed with the D-Rats. Look at that ASSHOLE psycho VA Gov and his attempt to shred the Constitution.

    It’s way past time to come down hard on these criminals because they don’t believe they have to obey the law. Right now, in FL, there is a court battle going on because a stupid lefty judge in Tallahassee ruled that local and state elected officials do not have to obey the law if they don’t like it. We are at this point because not a damn thing has been done to these people.

    Let me tell you, if this was the 1960s, every one of these elected criminals would be in Fed prison for violating federal law; if the country is to stabilize, they must be stopped. Right now, they have essentially started an insurrection, just because there’s been no shooting yet, makes it no less. In VA, we are likely to eventually see some shooting with what that psycho, baby murdering governor is trying to pull. It needs to be stopped and the FEDS CAN do it once the criminals in leadership are removed. JMHO

    Liked by 17 people

    • –Wow, what a stupid farce. Essentially, the D-Rats have “arrested” President Trump without cause (impeachment) and are now demanding the “evidence” to justify the arrest. —
      Curious point there. Generally, the Federal Courts have a fundamental distinction:
      a CRIMINAL case is brought when someone breaks the law.
      a CIVIL case is brought when no law is broken.

      Seems to me, that in the Democrats’ rush to impeach, they have filed a frivolous lawsuit against President Trump. I expect that Rudy will point out that under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Democratic House Impeachment Managers COULD be subject to a frivolous lawsuit claim where they are personally liable for the truth or falsity of their actions.

      Liked by 6 people

      • cboldt says:

        The court parallel works fine to outline the general procedural functions, but civil sanctions (Rule 11, etc.) are only for issues that are literally before a court.
        Impeachment is, from a “court involved” standpoint, purely political. Congress can set its own boundaries.
        In a concurring opinion in the (Judge) Nixon v. US case, Souter said a court might be justified stepping in if the outcome was decided by coin toss, or some other patently ridiculous process was employed.
        While I view the current process as patently ridiculous – it takes bad faith all around to get where the DEMs are – I doubt a court would want to taint itself with the crap that Congress has covered itself with.

        Liked by 2 people

        • –Impeachment is, from a “court involved” standpoint, purely political.–

          Which is why the Democrats briefs about their “Judicial Impeachment Authority” becomes a double edged sword. if Democrats claim “Judicial Authority” then thy have to act “Judicial”, as in neutral, as in providing basic due process to the person. The more accurate description of Democrats would be “Prosecutorial Authority”: an advocate, a person who’s mind is already made up, a definitely NOT neutral person.

          So, oddly, I’m looking forward to Democrats obtaining the legal POWERS of Judicial Authority, because that subjects them to legal PUNISHMENTS for abusing Judicial Authority.

          Basically, I imagine this as if Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff were in the “Indiana Jones” movies. They raise their hands and swear that they have been fair and impartial, and then Schiff melts Like German Major Thot, while Pelosi just crumbles to a pile of dust, high heels and dentures.

          Liked by 1 person

          • cboldt says:

            — if Democrats claim “Judicial Authority” then thy have to act “Judicial”, as in neutral —
            Emphasis on “act” as in phony.
            From my point of view, the House has invoked its impeachment authority all around. All the proper forms (votes on initiation, votes on outcome) exist.
            Like the Russia collusion hoax, the Ukraine hoax proceeding lacks factual predicate. But action can be converted in malfeasance by the application of bad faith, and that is what the uniparty is doing against Trump..
            It’s a bit like true believers in ancient aliens, Coast to Coast, pick your conspiracy, it is easy enough to gin up a support base for literally ANYTHING.

            Like

  15. emet says:

    Which are the high crimes and which are the misdemeanors? Don’t they have to say?

    Like

    • Deplorable_Vespucciland says:

      There aren’t any crimes. Their main beef is that Trump defeated Queen Hillary and for THAT he must be impeached. Mainstream news media and all 17 IC agencies agree … “Orange man bad!”

      Liked by 4 people

  16. Let’s cut to the chase –

    The House Impeachment articles do not identify any “high crime or misdemeanor”.
    Without an alleged crime, “Judicial Impeachment Authority”, does not apply.

    Pelosi and Schiff were in such a hurry to impeach that they forgot to name a crime.
    Instead of the House bringing a CRIMINAL impeachment alleging a CRIME, they have brought a CIVIL impeachment raising a POLITICAL question. Political questions are generally non-jusiticable.

    Liked by 7 people

    • WES says:

      Ha1:. Good summary! Also agrees with SD’s idea that Impeachment is just an end to a means. Civil has lower standard to meet, which suits Dem just fine.

      Liked by 1 person

      • cboldt says:

        The standard of proof in an impeachment is whatever any individual senator chooses to apply for his own vote. There are 100 senators. It stands to reason that a third of them are literally nuts and will cast arbitrary votes, or votes out of pique (one way or the other) or just to hold position at the next election (nothing to do with facts of the case).

        Like

        • –The standard of proof in an impeachment is whatever any individual senator chooses to apply for his own vote. —

          Correct.
          However, there IS a catch-all law, the Federal Tort Claims Act, which makes it a crime for a person to use the powers of their Federal office for personal gain, or to punish opponents.
          The twist here is that, generally, Federal prosecutors are given broad discretion (e.g. immunity) for their actions and decisions about how to conduct an investigation. The decisions a federal prosecutor makes every day about who to prosecute and how to prosecute, are given a VERY high level of deference because “this is their day job.”

          That is rather different from the “House Impeachment Managers”, (e.g. media-attention-seekers in the House of Representatives). They are NOT doing this as their “day job.”
          That would suggest that they DON’T have immunity if we later find out they were lying to us.

          That seems like a VERY GOOD THING to discuss right now. What are DOWNSIDES to the House Impeachment Managers, when they bring a frivolous lawsuit/frivolous prosecution? Are they personally liable, because they freely chose to take the position, take the free publicity, take the prestige?

          When they fail, (not if), are the responsible for paying Trump’s legal fees?

          Liked by 1 person

          • cboldt says:

            The House voted to impeach, as a body. There is no personal liability for voting a bogus impeachment. It is an institutional failure.
            I don’t see the managers as having any heightened liability. In a courtroom, prosecutors and defendant lawyers are “allowed” to lie in the sense that it is not a crime, and they are advocates for a position, not for truth and justice. I don’t care that prosecutor’s ethics says “justice,” that’s a myth. The vexatious suit hurdle is crazy high, but again, this is not a courtroom, this is Congress being an ass. There is no remedy at law fo congress bening an ass.

            Liked by 1 person

            • Paul Cohen says:

              OT: say, cboldt, are you still hanging around with the Qanon lunatics at FreeRepublic? I never could understand how a seemingly rational person like you (might be) could put up with those Qooks for so long. Have you finally realized that Qanon is demented nonsense? What is true in Q is in no way unique to Q (just scraped up from around the web and re-packaged), and what is unique to Q is typically hype, ranting, and/or lunatic ranting.

              Like

              • Robin Ruprecht says:

                I take offense to your higher-than-thou attitude. Even if Q is just scraping up info from around the web and repackaging it, at least it has brought awareness to a massive amount of people who otherwise wouldn’t have found the information. It doesn’t make any of us Qooks. in fact, I’d be willing to bet most of us Q followers are more informed than those of you who refuse to think outside the box. You have the mindset of a typical Democrat….insulting anyone who doesn’t see things the same as you.

                Like

                • Paul Cohen says:

                  ha ha, I have gone through enormous efforts on other sites to attempt calm rational respectful discussions with people drawn to the Qanon world. Such efforts are universally rebuffed by angry lunatics following Q with all the usual slogans and nonsense. I have given up trying to regard such types with any respect when they do not display or deserve it themselves.

                  As for “awareness” — it is not good awareness if it is larded with many false, exaggerated, and/or irrational beliefs…… which is what Q-world offers.

                  Far better to analyze all available info without the fake Q overlays. Yes, there is plenty of important info out there but Q adds nothing of value, only distortions and falsehoods.

                  Liked by 1 person

                • Paul Cohen says:

                  I’m sure Qooks will never take any refutations as final, not even from POTUS Trump, because their Magic Oracle “Q” has said that “disinformation is necessary” and they always weave all doubts and setbacks into new narratives. Still, a Trump campaign official has emphatically rejected the Qanon movement as “garbage” and “bizarre nonsense” — and as not based upon any genuine role in the Trump administration or campaign:


                  @christianllamar
                  Follow Follow @christianllamar
                  More
                  Replying to @ernie_plumley @FINALLEVEL
                  You’re way too late now. Trump Campaign Chair of Veterans for Trump has confirmed my reply tweet on
                  Q Anon with multiple tweets.

                  7:50 PM – 30 Dec 2019
                  1 Like

                  Like

                • Paul Cohen says:

                  That is terribly sad, because they are bad, malicious, irrational people. They troll insanely against anyone who dares to question their hoax narrative.

                  Liked by 1 person

  17. fangdog says:

    Everything I have points to a 30-thousand Dow sometime 2020. There will be corrections which afford buying opportunity, but there will be higher highs throughout the year. It takes about 3-years from the time a major manufacturing is announced and it finally gets on line. The number which has been announced will be up and running in 2020. This doesn’t consider all the small private enterprise investments which will be coming on line.

    Somewhere in the not too distant future trade deals with the UK and EU will culminate and add to what has already has been accomplished. The US needs economically strong trading partners in order to enhance demand world-wide for our products. The result will be a benefit for the “little guy” (American workers) never before imagined. The “trillions at stake” will now go to average Americans instead of “Deep State” Globalist elites. Part of this for the “little guy” will be accomplished in the form of another tax-cut after the election.

    Liked by 17 people

  18. fiser10 says:

    I’ve been saying this exact thing!! Thank you. Of course you have said it much more eloquently.

    Like

  19. arsumbris says:

    I think you’re right that the ultimate purpose is to get the 6(e) materials, but they won’t change the outcome in Senate. Trump’s tax returns won’t change a single vote in his base, and likely won’t influence independents significantly. “Thinking” about obstructing still doesn’t constitute obstruction, and appealing Congressional subpoenas on executive privilege grounds doesn’t either.

    So assuming the Dems aren’t completely delusional, and think that Trump’s tax returns are going to help them in the general election (proportionately to this effort), what else might be in that testimony they can use — not just for offensive purposes, but for defensive purposes?

    Much of this pseudo-impeachment drama is defensive, to get out ahead of DNC actions to create the Russia Collusion hoax. This wasn’t just Brennan, Rice, Comey, and Clinton — it was paid for by the DNC. They’ve known the origin of the fake premise for investigating Trump, and known that their servers weren’t hacked by Russia since 2015-2016.

    How exposed criminally, and in terms of civil litigation is the DNC over that?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Mr e-man says:

      I don’t think this Lawfare strategy is that simple. They appear to have it all well thought out, and executed. Sure, one goal is to taint Trump for 2020, and to get oppo research to do even more, but I don’t think they have given up on removing Trump.

      If they know what’s out there, then they know how to use it to convince 18 Republicans to convict. But there is way more to it than that. They are many steps ahead. An example, how many R’s were saying or thinking they would hold sending articles to the Senate? That wasn’t a last second thought by Nanzi but it seems to have caught the R’s by surprise. That happens a lot.

      Like

    • mikeyboo says:

      arsumbris-I don’t think it’s the DNC so much as it is Obama, himself, whom the Democrats are seeking to protect now. After all, we know Obama was complicit in the Ukraine/Biden deal since Biden announced ON CAMERA: “call him-if the prosecutor isn’t fired, you’re not getting the billion.” And who profited off the arms sales to Qaddafi? And the Iran nuclear deal?
      Yes, they want to “get Trump”. But I believe they are equally terrified that Obama will be exposed. Obama wasn’t a poor innocent Santa Claus with a bunch of naughty elves. And if he fears going down, it is a lead pipe cinch, he will bring down all those White boys (and girls-looking at you Hilary) with him. There may well be conversations among DC big wigs right now along the lines of “if I go down, you’re all going down with me.”
      If Pres Trump’s back is to the wall, he may have to be Samson and bring down the entire corrupt DC temple. It seems like they are daring him to do it.

      Like

  20. dustahll says:

    Big picture, the deep state, DNC, Congress are roughly 90% corrupt, the resistance is all about resist exposure. I see a lot of the shaking in their boots.

    Like

  21. Mongo Mere Pawn says:

    Now it makes sense. The House is driving impeachment-related litigation to SCOTUS to block the nomination of another Trump Supreme Court justice in the event of the Notorious RBG’s demise. Plus SCOTUS consideration will tend to legitimize their impeachment effort because, even if they ultimately reject them, the justices will consider the House’s arguments respectfully. Also, if the DC Circuit orders production and the President ends up seeking SCOTUS review, the House will no doubt urge the Chief Justice to recuse himself due to his having to preside over the Senate trial, with a 4-4 vote leaving the lower court’s disclosure order in place. Pelosi really does intend to hold onto the articles for the duration of the campaign. Wow.

    Liked by 2 people

    • The American Patriot says:

      The House is out of power and DONE!

      This is The Senate’s issue now.

      Liked by 1 person

    • willyeye says:

      It’s only the Senate rules that require the physical delivery of the Articles. McConnell could get the rules changed, announce a date for the Senate trial, and then continue without Pelosi.

      Liked by 1 person

      • cboldt says:

        — It’s only the Senate rules that require the physical delivery of the Articles. —
        There is an axiomatic point here, aside from what “physical” form an accusation takes.
        One party to an issue brings the issue (in this case some accusations) to the tribunal. The tribunal does not bring itself to the issue, it does not present the issue to itself.
        The natural next step in this farce is for POTUS to petition the House, or for the Senate to pass a non-binding “sense of the Senate” resolution that the House has a duty to promptly do what it literally resolved to do – exhibit the articles to the Senate.
        There are many ways to express why this duty exists, but they all turn on the fact that investigating and drafting the articles was a public process. Not a private one, like, for example, grand jury where an accused is anonymous and reputation is preserved.
        The public is entitled to prompt resolution, and the House is holding it up.

        Like

      • Issy says:

        That is exactly what should be done. The house is in sole charge of the impeachment. (charges) The senate in sole charge of the disposition of those charges.

        Like

  22. jello333 says:

    And any ruling that went against Trump/us will obviously move on to the Supreme Court, which would extend this out several more months. So it’s possible Nancy tries to hold out indefinitely. Though of course at any time the Senate could just say ENOUGH and move on its own.

    Like

  23. Midnite says:

    And it’s for this reason that Mitch and Lindsey can argue that no witnesses will be brought before the Senate. If the Senate rules that they’ll take up the articles as presented by the HJC and no further testimony or witnesses will be allowed, it would cut the Dems off at the knees in their effort to gain the 6e material. The President may want a full blown trial to expose the Dems, but it could backfire, so take the short way out and Nuke ’em instead.

    Liked by 2 people

  24. Batman says:

    Whatever they do will backfire because the voters are not giving up this president. I’m surprised the grand jury information has not leaked. Must be dynamite for the Dems to hold it this close to the vest. Right! (Sarcasm)
    More likely they are desperate for any bargaining chips in the coming weeks to turn Barr and Durham away from judgement. It’s always quid pro quo or else in DC.

    Liked by 1 person

  25. Aeyrie says:

    Ok. These people are frying my layperson’s brain with this nonsense! Do they really expect this is going to work? Doing legal procedures upside down and backwards (de rigueur for the dark side apparently!) and omitting some steps as well if I am correctly understanding what is being explained here… are they insane? Is there any chance they could actually succeed with any of this?

    Like

    • Dee says:

      All you need to do is look what they have gotten so far. No one stops them they just keep coming and will for ever.

      Liked by 1 person

    • cboldt says:

      Yes, there is a non-trivial chance of success. Congress and the courts are failed instututions, unfaithful to the constitution and fundamental honesty and fairness in many ways.
      It’s part of human nature. Sometimes the barbarians win. In our case, many have won elected office, and even control of the House of Representatives. See “universal suffrage” and the inevitable outcome of that.

      Like

      • And…as SD has pointed out many times…none of this is playing out unscripted or by accident. LAWFARE has been working on this plan for years. To assume that they are idiots or short sighted is perhaps the worst mistake one could make (and one that Democrats often make due to their disdain for conservatives…see a Reagan, Bush 43 (Agieren and Kerry), and the VSGPDJT himself (HRC). They fail to respect their opponent and fail because of their hubris). One needs to put themselves in Pelosi’s and Lawfares’ shoes and learn what THEY are afraid of. At the very least they need to be put on defense…which means that WE have to go on offense—a withering, merciless offense. (I believe they are afraid of Barr, Durham, Steele…and PDJT.

        Like

        • California Joe says:

          The Lawfare attorneys are Leftist Bolsheviks who depend upon Bolshevik judges for their success in court. Let’s see how far they get when the judge is Irish or Italian and appointed by President Trump! Their self-promoting form of tribal nepotism won’t be able to save them.

          Like

  26. Troublemaker10 says:

    Can the Senate change rules with simple majority?

    If so, they should take up impeachment trial and dismiss/acquit right away.

    That would make this court case immaterial to impeachment truak. Before it ever gets through appeal process/scotus .

    This is war. Play to win. Don’t let them set a dangerous precedent on 6e material either.

    Liked by 1 person

  27. OldParatrooper says:

    Pretty hard to argue the relevance of Trump Russia information collected, analyzed and reported to the public in March 2019 to a Trump Ukraine phone call that happened in September 2019.

    Liked by 1 person

  28. Bryan Alexander says:

    Two Predictions:
    1. Mitch McConnell will stab President Trump in the back. More than once.
    2. Senate RINOs will do everything possible to cripple Trump, stopping short of removing him as president. I predict over 60 votes to remove from office.

    Like

  29. Magabear says:

    So if the Senate dismisses shampeachment before the courts make a ruling on any of the cases, it would seem to torpedo the dimms whole rationale for needing said materials and testimony. More reason for the turtle to move quickly, if only to stick it to Nancy and her evil elves that much more. 😎

    Like

  30. Pew-Anon says:

    A couple thoughts…

    Hidden in plain sight seems to be the fact that the House had the ability all along to do for itself exactly what it is now asking the federal courts to do for it. If the House wanted the Mueller 6e material and an enforceable McGahn subpoena, all it had to do was hold the full floor vote to initiate the inquiry and it’s a done deal. Indeed, this can STILL be done at any time, but that of course would have the untenable ramifications, from the Dems perspective, of giving POTUS full Due Process. Just like the articles are an impeachment without a crime, these court pleadings seek a remedy for no ailment. In other words, the House could solve its own problem any time, if not for the self-immolating political consequences. One would think this reality should weigh heavily in the court’s decision, if it has an ounce of integrity.

    Also, I strongly suspect there is more than just opposition research in the 6e material, hence the House Dems unprecedented desperation and apoplexy to obtain it. It likely contains more fabricated evidence, of the kind the IG report exposed. If the Weissman crew (Clinesmith) did it once that we know about, we would be naive not to expect more.

    Liked by 2 people

    • mimbler says:

      I could be wrong, but I don’t think the house had the authority to get the GJ information. There are laws against its release.

      Like

      • Pew-Anon says:

        The House is pleading to “judicial” authority to obtain the 6e. It’s the same judicial authority they would otherwise have for themselves if they held the full inquiry vote. Granted, the hoops to jump through might be different, and someone like ristvan can speak to that, but to suggest that the courts are the only remedy for the House to obtain the 6e regardless of whether they held the inquiry vote is, I think, a canard on their part.

        Liked by 1 person

        • LouisianaTeaRose says:

          Totally agree with you here and above.

          In addition, I cannot imagine them as ultimately successful in by any means getting the 6e stuff legally. This abomination-gate has run roughshod over every stopping point in the flowchart of law and constitutionality that success will be impossible in the legal arena.

          Which means that it will just get leaked anyway. They have probably already prepared the suicide bombers for that mission. They are beyond desperate.

          These people are fighting for their very lives, not just their political and financial fortunes.

          President Trump may be winning the battle, but he has NEVER been in more danger than he is now, and it will become exponentially worse by the day.

          Trillions….

          Like

  31. DSP2 says:

    This is not an impeachment, this is an attempt to overthrow the US Constitution.

    Liked by 6 people

  32. Ellis says:

    What does this have to do with the phone call with the Ukrainian president? It seems to me that would be the primary question the left would have to answer to a judge. The law still would not be on their side. This is a waste if time.

    Like

  33. Newhere says:

    Voting on articles to trigger a Senate trial doesn’t make their arguments any better, in fact anyone objectively following the facts can see the tortured manipulations and cynical over-reach to obtain what they are Constitutionally barred from obtaining. A court, and any objective person, will see it didn’t have to be this way, and the House deliberately confused the process and weakened its own Constitutional foundation.

    There was a straight-forward, historically-tested path for the House to seek 6(e) material and compel testimony (by which Congress has prevailed in the past), but the House deliberately bypassed that route in a flurry of admitted haste, voted on articles (on the claim of “undisputed” evidence), only to jam the breaks (using contested Constitutional authority) to afford them time to go back to the courts anyway, seeking the same information they claimed in the first instance they didn’t have time to wait for and didn’t need. Their case is like an impressionist painting — it requires you to stand at a distance and squint, because if you look too close it’s just a bunch of meaningless dots.

    This stunt DOES however, create a no-lose for the coup-plotters in that the dizzying Constitutional ploy creates enough inter-branch chaos that sympathetic jurists might (if they wanted to) find “novel questions” to exploit as cover for abandoning all reason and settled principles to side with the anarchists. On the other hand, if the jurists (rightfully) don’t play along, the plotters still succeed in dragging out the fight, heightening political tensions, drawing the third branch of government into their Republic-endangering scheme, and thus further de-stabilizing social consensus around the institutions of our democracy.

    In short, if they can’t win, they want to be sure the public is unable to figure out what’s true, confused and deluded about whom (or what processes) to trust, and unwilling to accept the administration of justice and accountability.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Magabear says:

      Your last paragraph sums up how the dimms operate perfectly. 👍

      Nancy & Co. will drag this out for as long as they can. They know their shampeachment will go nowhere in the Senate, but their real hope is that the longer they keep this charade going, the better for their prospects in November. I think it will do the exact opposite, but people possessed with TDS can’t be reasoned with.

      Liked by 1 person

    • jrapdx says:

      Your argument is logical re: Democrats attempting via this court action to confuse the public, cast doubt on the truthfulness of President Trump, etc.

      However isn’t that what has been their aim from the beginning of their conspiracy against DJT? And of course we know that was going on well before the 2016 election. The main question is how effective all this plotting and smearing has been.

      As we survey the impeachment situation it appears President Trump is gaining approval among many segments of the electorate. Even if Democrats get court-ordered access to certain “dirt” contained in the Mueller documents very likely it will have little effect on the outcome.

      To be sure Democrats will attempt to make mountains out of molehills as they’ve been doing. But no merit in handing Democrats scurrilous material they’ll intentionally misuse. The courts definitely should deny releasing nominally secret proceedings of grand juries.

      Without doubt, the President and his legal team are aware of these maneuvers and preparing for the fallout whichever way it lands. In any case I see no reason to think the Democrats will be more successful in current moves than with prior efforts to “neutralize” the President.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Hence the value of a withering offense featuring Barr Durban et al. If every offensive move the Dems make can be presented as defense, distraction, obstruction against accountability for their truly high crimes (including high treason), then their every move further condemns them in the court of public opinion. It has never failed to amaze me that Republicans are so inept at this type of game. All they need to do is use the script that has been used against them their entire career. It’s a men are from Mars, women are from Venus scenario. Looked at another way, it’s pure alinsky. Read the book and follow the rules, Republicans.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Women (or at least “Mean Girls”) are better at this than (“traditional”) men , Democrats are better at than Republicans, liberals better than conservatives. In this case, grow a pair (the “other pair”)

          Like

        • A second pronged offense needs to be waged on the legacy media. Today’s legacy “journalists” were schooled by the boomers still basking in the tales of watergate, Woodward and Bernstein, the unrest of the ‘60s and 70s, Vietnam, etc. and the “giants” of a 3 network news menu. Woodward and Bernstein were under 30 during watergate if I remember correctly). The 24 hour cable news cycle gives them more air time to make a name for themselves, but also more competition and less to talk about. They are in danger of their moment passing, without a purpose or their own story to tell. Most of them thought this could be their moment and prostituted themselves to the coup plotters to seize the moment. Now they can’t get out.

          So…a wedge needs to be driven between the Chuck Todd’s, Rachel maddows, brian Shelter’s, etc., and the new/next generation of journalists—the next Woodward and Bernstein, the ambititious 30 year olds who see that their elders sold themselves out, and are mortally wounded. As fellow ambitious opportunists, they could see the truth as THEIR opportunity, their moment by taking down the legacy media.

          Lastly, the J schools need to see an opportunity to redeem themselves…or become irrelevant…or shamed into oblivion. (It only takes one.)

          Like

        • jrapdx says:

          Yes, how often it’s said the most effective defense is robust offense. Those “in the know” proclaim Barr is highly honorable, but of course we can’t say it’s true.

          Rather we look to public traces of his actions, when we don’t see anything we recognize as connected to disturbing events we naturally become skeptical of the man’s actual virtue.

          It could be true that Barr, Durham, et. al., are constrained by elements inherent in their official positions, political necessities or perhaps even the law itself. All we have to go by are the hints that escape as “news” or rumors for public consumption.

          Much of the time we’re reduced to reading tea leaves and have little solid to go on until situations are fully ripe. Until that comes to pass, I’ll put faith in President Trump’s judgement.

          To date he’s expressed confidence in Barr, so I’ll suspend my judgement of Barr for a while longer. But I concur with you that the time’s at hand for the kind of actions that protect the country against the predations of perfidious Democrats.

          Like

  34. cdor1 says:

    Don McGhan testified to Mueller for about 30 hours. He wasn’t Trump’s lawyer when Trump spoke to the Ukrainian president. If there was anything problematic for Trump in the Grand Jury material, does anyone think that Weissman wouldn’t have included it in his report (the one about which Mueller testified to Congress)? Is Pelosi really attempting to re-litigate the Russia collusion idiocy? I say, McConnell, change the Senate rules so that you don’t need a piece of paper to prove the President has been impeached, you can just read the Congressional Record, and get on with the trial. The American people are sick of all these games. We pay you Congressfolks way to much money for you to play around with something so serious. Donald Trump is our President. Quit messing with him and let him continue doing his job.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Pew-Anon says:

      The issue for the Dems, of course, is there was nothing problematic for Trump in the McGahn testimony, or any of the rest of the Mueller 6e material. Therefore Mueller had nothing that could be used directly. So how, then, do they they make it problematic for Trump? Simple. They just make something up. They fabricate fraudulent evidence, not unlike what Clinesmith did, then insert it into the 6e material for Nadler to “find”. That way there is the full imprimatur of a House impeachment process to obfuscate the fraud, which would be harder to conceal in a SC investigation. I suspect that is why they are so desperate to obtain it, and so desperate to deny POTUS Due Process in the effort.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Pew-Anon says:

      The issue for the Dems, of course, is there was nothing problematic for Trump in the McGahn testimony, or any of the rest of the Mueller 6e material. Therefore Mueller had nothing that could be used directly. So how, then, do they they make it problematic for Trump? Simple. They just make something up. They fabricate fraudulent evidence, not unlike what Clinesmith did, then insert it into the 6e material for Nadler to “find”. That way there is the full imprimatur of a House impeachment process to obfuscate the fraud, which would be harder to conceal in a SC investigation. I suspect that is why they are so desperate to obtain it, and so desperate to deny POTUS Due Process in the effort.

      Liked by 1 person

  35. TPW says:

    All Material collected during SC should be illegal. That said I am not understanding who the grand jury material is against and why wasnt it used against PT in the report if it is about him and his operations? Makes no sense that it would be useful to the Dems articles of impeachment or related to their charge of obstruction when that was all presented in the report. why hasn’t anything come of the Grand Jury ? Did they proceed with indictments?

    Like

    • Deplorable_Vespucciland says:

      All this nonsense about Mueller’s supposedly damaging Grand Jury material is just part of the ongoing leftwing smear campaign against the president. The democrats are depending on their mass media henchmen pushing insinuation & innuendo to damage the president’s approval ratings and help some unnamed democrat in next year’s election. The Senate needs to throw out the phony impeachment case ASAP and get on with doing the peoples’ business.

      Liked by 1 person

  36. Hans says:

    Oh how the money is going to flow… just imagine the stakes.. on one side the Corrupt politicians getting millions from the kick backs from the SD money laundering operation. The Globalist wanting millions of illegal aliens for cheap labor and economy disruption . On the other side PDT in their way working for We the People. (Short Example)

    I wonder if the USSC is political. I wonder if they could be bribed to look the other way. If I look at the FISA court as an indication it is sure is possible.

    It is generally agreed upon that PDT would win under a FAIR election. We know that the democrats have no intention of playing fair. Leaked Mueller grand jury material. Would be homogenized, parsed and twisted. This would serve as a cover for massive election fraud and stealing the 2020 election. Democrats are doing all they can to let the dead vote arguing against elimination of non active voters.

    It might just be that Martial law might be PDT last bullet. You can bet if that occurs AntiFa will be marching and possible lead to massive riots that have occurred in the past century.

    Looks like Barr and Durham could save our republic by declaring all mueller material fruit of the poison tree and stop this before we go down the Civil War route. I Remember learning that hot wars starts when diplomacy fails. Since the democrats do not want a fair political solution as evidenced by the distorted impeachment . So for practical purposes we could say that diplomacy is not an option.

    AG Barr you know what to do to save this nation and millions of causalties. You could be the AG to go down as the AG who stood up and did the right thing for We the People and averted the Second US Civil war.

    Like

  37. Coast says:

    So the democrats generated two articles of impeachment…and now they are shopping for evidence or justification. And if that’s not bad enough, they are looking for that evidence from an investigation that was done based on illegal FISA warrants. Do we not have any honest courts to stop this BS?

    Liked by 1 person

  38. The American Patriot says:

    This isn’t going to end well for them

    Like

  39. Newhere says:

    Also: McConnell put off USMCA until after impeachment trial. If Nancy’s not committing on when she sends the Articles, what about the USMCA vote?

    If McConnell doesn’t move ahead with it when Congress gets back, if he doesn’t have articles in hand, we’re watching typical Uniparty kabuki, and Team Trump surely will know and hopefully will up its game.

    Like

  40. Doug Amos says:

    This may be an ensnarement, set by President Trump. Everything collusion begins with Crowdstrike, the same Crowdstrike The President implicated in his conversation with Ukraine officials. Everyone knows that what Crowdsrike claims was an impossibility; their claims cannot withstand expert scrutiny. That window to investigate them was opened with that conversation.

    Liked by 2 people

  41. David Farrar says:

    I didn’t think there was any grand jury testimony with counter-Intel. investigations. Although there may be grand jury testimony in a criminal case of “obstruction.”

    Like

  42. Han Solo says:

    Seems to me that one would have to justify the articles…the articles are so vague, how can they be justified? Thus, there is reasoning is typical liberal mush! Further, one can make the same arguments here that they really want the information for political purposes. Finally, turning over information in a grand jury is against the law, which was Barr’s excuse for not turning it over in the first place. Oh, and the second article referring to obstruction was already countered by Barr. How can there be obstruction of justice when no crime has been committed?

    Liked by 1 person

  43. fangdog says:

    IMO, the average voter does not believe or is concerned Trump will be removed. The average voter does not follow all the nuances and intrigue involved with the impeachment process because it is too complicated and more important it is ultimately a nothing burger. Until arrests are made of wrong doers wake me when it does.

    What the average voter cares about is his financial security, personal safety and personal freedom. With that being said, there is a natural comfort level with Trump and there is no way Democrats, RINOs and “Deep State” are going to change the feeling of the average voter when it comes to Trump. In fact, just the opposite as more “average” democrats want the same feeling for themselves. This leaves about 30% of the voters controlling 90% of the day to day narrative thanks to the corrupt and fake media.

    Like

  44. Doppler says:

    DC Circuit Judges designated to 3Judge panel to hear the arguments, and decide:

    Neomi Rao – Trump appointee
    Thomas Grifffith – Bush Appointee
    Judith Rogers – Clinton Appointee

    Not a bad panel, IMHO.

    Liked by 2 people

  45. mitch needs to take it up in the senate and put it to bed. force the dims to go back and authorize the articles,this will force them to give PDT due process and they don’t want that.catch-22 they want to get trump but letting trump call witnesses will destroy them.

    Like

  46. islandpalmtrees says:

    It seems apparent that Jerry Nadler would not be seeking the 6(e) material gathered by the Mueller team from grand jury proceedings unless they knew exactly what was in this material. Or, to say this differently they are seeking a means to legally release the contents of the 6(e) material. To in effect launch yet another Dossier.

    Even a DC Judge should ask his or herself how did Jerry Nadler , Pelosi and Schiff know they needed this 6e material in order to make their impeachment case and still vote for impeachment. Or to say this differently, how could most of the Socialist Democrats vote for something, they had not seen all of the evidence on.

    Will-full Blindness, by Judges on those cases affecting President Trump. Whoever, the judges are they must realize the criminal activity being revealed on Jerry Nadler , Pelosi, Schiff and families is their reason for Impeaching President Trump, before they are found guilty of money laundering.

    Like

  47. VoteOutIncumbents says:

    Re: McGann’s compelled testimony…whatever happened to attorney/client privilege? Did it fly out the door with Michael Cohen’s arrest and forced testimony? I am old enough to remember Watergate. At that time and since, I thought president’s had an absolute right to receive legal advice from attorneys that could not be discovered in an investigation as a matter of principle and law?

    Like

  48. Gary Lacey says:

    Mitch could stall the Senate trial until the new house is installed in 1/2021, by kicking the can down the road

    Like

  49. darwin says:

    Wouldn’t any material gathered during illegal surveillance be inadmissible in any court, much less an impeachment of the president of the US?

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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