‘The Origin of The Feces’ – White House Lawyer Patrick Philbin Explains House Circumvention of Constitution During Impeachment…

As 21 different state attorneys general noted earlier today, there are several reasons why the impeachment effort is unconstitutional.  These are not process arguments; they are factual arguments central to the constitutional framework of our government.

The failure of a full House vote to authorize the House Judiciary Committee to pursue evidence -via enforceable subpoenas- was a defect by design of Nancy Pelosi’s decision to initiate an impeachment inquiry by her decree, not an authorizing vote.  White House lawyer Patrick Philbin explains the legal issue; this could be the lead argument in the defense case when it starts.  [Video prompted to 03:20]

.

CTH noted this structural issue last August, and the issue remained throughout the heavily manipulated proceedings. None of the House requests for testimony or documents held any enforcement authority because the House did not follow the constitutional process.

The House was not issuing subpoenas, it was issuing letters requesting voluntary witness participation and document production. Recently the DOJ Office of Legal Counsel explained this issue in a lengthy legal finding that leads to the same conclusion.

.

BACKSTORY – Last year House Democrat leadership took a climate assessment of democrat House members and Speaker Pelosi announced they would not hold a House impeachment authorization vote. As a direct and specific consequence all committee subpoenas did not carry a penalty for non-compliance.

(Source)

“Lawful subpoenas”, literally require an enforcement mechanism; that’s the “poena” part of the word. The enforcement mechanism is a judicial penalty, and that penalty can only be created if the full House voted to authorize an impeachment inquiry, and charged the House Judiciary Committee with the authority therein.

Absent the vote to authorize, the Legislative Branch never established compulsion authority (aka judicial enforcement authority), as they attempted to work through their quasi-constitutional “impeachment inquiry” process.

Instead of subpoenas, Adam Schiff (House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence); and Chairman Eliot L. Engel (House Committee on Foreign Affairs) were only sending out request letters. The compliance was discretionary based on the outlook of the recipient.

Nancy Pelosi did not have the vote or political capital to start by initiating a full House impeachment authorization. Pelosi, Schiff, Engel and Cummings had to rely on the duplicity of the media to help them hide their scheme; and the media complied.

Speaker Pelosi & Lawfare’s impeachment scheme could only succeed with a compliant media protecting it. The media was entirely compliant in not explaining the fraudulent basis for the construct.

If the media would have ever asked questions the fraud would have collapsed.

Adam Schiff had to hide his hearings because the foundation of the impeachment fraud was to create a public impression. There was no structural impeachment process or guideline being followed. The committee leadership used the closed door hearings to leak information to the media to create a needed narrative.

A legislative “letter” or demand request needed to carry judicial enforcement authority –A PENALTY– in order to be a “subpoena”.

There was no penalty that can be associated with the House demands because the Legislative Branch did not established compulsion authority (aka judicial enforcement authority), as they worked through their non-constitutional “impeachment inquiry” process.

It has long been established by SCOTUS that Congress has lawful (judicial authority) subpoena powers pursuant to its implied responsibility of legislative oversight. However, that only applies to the powers enumerated in A1§8. Neither foreign policy (Ukraine) nor impeachment have any nexus to A1§8. The customary Legislative Branch subpoena power is limited to their legislative purpose.

There is an elevated level of subpoena, a power made possible by SCOTUS precedent, that carries inherent penalties for non-compliance, and is specifically allowed for impeachment investigations. However, that level of elevated House authority required a full House authorization vote, and only applies to the House Judiciary Committee as empowered.

In 2019 the Legislative Branch was NOT expressing their “impeachment authority” as part of the Legislative Branch purpose. So that raised the issue of an entirely different type of subpoena:… A demand from congress that penetrates the constitutional separation of powers; and further penetrates the legal authority of Executive Branch executive privilege.

It was separately established by SCOTUS during the Nixon impeachment investigation that *IF* the full House votes to have the Judiciary Committee commence an impeachment investigation, then the Judiciary Committee has subpoena power that can overcome executive privilege claims.

There was NO VOTE to create that level of subpoena power.

As a consequence, the House did not create a process to penetrate the constitutionally inherent separation of powers, and/or, the legally recognized firewall known as ‘executive privilege’.

The House needed to vote to authorize the committee impeachment investigation, and through that process the committee would have gained judicial enforcement authority. That would have created a penalty for non-compliance with an impeachment subpoena.

Absent a penalty for non-compliance, which factually makes a subpoena a ‘subpoena’, the Executive Branch had no process to engage an appellate review by federal courts. This was the purposeful trick within the Pelosi/Lawfare road-map.

Pelosi and Lawfare’s plan was designed for public consumption; she/they were creating the illusion of something that did not exist. The purpose of all their fraudulent impeachment activity was to create support for an actual impeachment process.

Because the Lawfare/Pelosi roadmap intended to work around judicial enforcement authority, the impeachment process was destined by design to end up running head-first into a constitutional problem; specifically separation of power and executive privilege.

The Lawfare impeachment road-map was designed to conflict with the constitution. It was a necessary -and unavoidable- feature of their sketchy impeachment plan, not a flaw.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her Lawfare allies changed House rules (SEE HERE). Pelosi and Lawfare changed House impeachment rules (SEE HERE). Pelosi/Lawfare changed committee rules (SEE HERE); and in doing so they removed House republicans from the entire process… Which They Did. However, what Lawfare and Pelosi could not change was The U.S. Constitution, which they were destined to collide with.

Speaker Pelosi’s ‘Lawfare House rules‘ and/or ‘Lawfare impeachment rules‘ could not supersede the constitutional separation of powers. She was well aware of this. Nancy Pelosi could not decree an “official impeachment inquiry”, and as a consequence nullify a constitutional firewall between the Legislative Branch and Executive Branch.

Pelosi’s impeachment scheme required a compliant media to support her construct…

They did exactly that.

This entry was posted in 4th Amendment, 6th Amendment, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, Election 2020, Impeachment, Lawfare, Legislation, media bias, Nancy Pelosi, Notorious Liars, President Trump, Ukraine, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

220 Responses to ‘The Origin of The Feces’ – White House Lawyer Patrick Philbin Explains House Circumvention of Constitution During Impeachment…

  1. As a man thinkth says:

    But that is something that is unlawful and disastrous to many loyal honest citizens…the subject is kinda like the gun debate…something needs to be done that satisfies protecting the rights of the public..

    Like

  2. Eileen McRae says:

    It should never be this easy to circumvent the Constitution of the United States of America and have no one to stand up and stop you! This amounts to an epic shredding of the rock upon which America was built!

    Liked by 7 people

    • mugzey302 says:

      The Senate should have immediately rejected the Articles upon delivery, as invalid due to the fraudulent actions of Cruella Pelosi and her crime network.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. X XYZ says:

    There was one statement in Sundance’s piece that is key to the impetus of this fiasco:
    “Pelosi and Lawfare’s plan was designed for public consumption; she/they were creating the illusion of something that did not exist. The purpose of all their fraudulent impeachment activity was to create support for an actual impeachment process.”

    In any course of behavior or action I always ask, what is the motive behind it? Initially Nancy knew that the effort to remove Trump would ultimately fail in the Senate. Someone twisted her arm to convince her to advance it. Who would that be? Who is the star presenter in this show trial? It is obvious: it’s Adam Schiff. Doddering Nancy does not have the intellect to run this show. This is Schiff’s brainchild. Nancy truly has Schiff for brains. Pun aside, he literally is the mastermind of this whole operation – This is the Schiff show. He’s the ringmaster.

    I’ve said from the start that the purpose of this circus was to create huge PR event, The Greatest Show on Earth, as grist for the media mill. Sundance echoes my opinion with the phrase “designed for public consumption”.

    What was the intended purpose behind this event? To bolster and increase the Democrat base in an attempt to win back the Senate and the presidency in the 2020 election. Will it succeed? I think we know it won’t. Meanwhile, Adam Schiff gets to bask in the spotlight. Will that benefit him? You decide…

    Like

    • Ackman419 says:

      Libtards think Schiff is a rock star. So, if the main idea here was to promote Schiff, then yes it’s working.
      Xyz, I agree that this is Schiffs baby.
      It’s like he’s been preparing for this moment for years. What a sick puppy.

      Like

      • X XYZ says:

        Sick puppy?

        I think ‘egomaniacal politician’ is a more apt description.

        Like

      • Mr e-man says:

        Schumer said the Republicans were entranced by Schiffs presentation. He looked around and they were all intently watching the excellent presentation by Herr Schiff. They were amazed at the information they were getting that they don’t get from Fox News.

        Schumer’s skill set has really increased dramatically. He can now read the minds of Republicans.

        Republicans should probably put on some tinfoil hats to keep Schumer out of their minds.

        Like

  4. jx says:

    They didn’t even follow their changed rules, Pelosi simply issued decrees.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. basically free advertising for the dems.they know trump has a warchest of millions and he doesn’t have to spend a dime til the dems have nominated a candidate.

    Like

    • Cam Heck says:

      I turned on Patriot on my sat radio last night as I was driving, and a guest on the Rebecca Mansour’s program was saying he believes POTUS has the right to bring the impeachment to SCOTUS, arguing it is unconstitutional. I wish I had caught his name but I had missed his introduction.In any event, his argument was sound and professional as though he was informed about this as a position Pres T should take.

      Like

  6. Mr e-man says:

    Yet here we are, having a “trial” based on an illegal process. Why could this not be stopped beforehand, and why is it not stopped immediately? Are we a nation of laws and a Constitution or not?

    Liked by 3 people

  7. islandpalmtrees says:

    Did anyone else catch Schiff saying “that the Republicans were unfit to run the country” as a reason for impeachment. I call this sold proof of sedition?

    Liked by 3 people

  8. islandpalmtrees says:

    Pleeease! Republican Senators – move for a dismissal of this sham impeachment. Everyone who has a pluse knows this is yet another fabrication by Schiff and the IC by now.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Mr e-man says:

      Are you sure? Schumer said yesterday the House Managers were extremely good at going through the details of all the crimes Trump committed and presented a well organized case of why Trump is guilty and why we should have more witnesses and documents to prove it.

      Of course, maybe he should wait until a defense is actually presented before he convicts. /sarc

      So the same presentation is seen by 100 people and 53 think it means one thing and 47 think it means the exact opposite. The common denominator? Political party affiliation.

      Absurd.

      Like

  9. Tom Hansen says:

    Remember, Pelosi said just last week, this impeachment was about the “allegations” not the “proof”.
    The Dems goal was to smear Trump with the stain of impeachment, so Trump would be identified as an impeachment President “forever” as Pelosi claimed.

    All the Dems had to do was invent an accusatory false narrative around an actual event, such as the phone call to the Ukrainian President, and twist the facts to create inferences to parody the phone call. This is exactly what Schiff did when he created a parody of the phone call during the House Intelligence Committee hearings.

    The Dems were very clever in creating the illusion of an impeachment inquiry, then creating two fake Articles of Impeachment that contained no crimes, since their goal was simply to use the allegations as the basis for their parody impeachment.

    This was entirely a ruse on the American public, but by doing so, the Dems made a mockery of the Constitutional requirements of the impeachment process.

    I expect Trump’s defense team will point out all of the corrupt tactics the Dems used to create the invalid and unconstitutional impeachment, and will request that the Senate not only recognize that this impeachment is not only invalid, and does not qualify to meet the requirements of high crimes and misdemeanors, but was knowingly and willfully done in such a fraudulent matter, that all those that participated in the fraud should be charged for subversive and seditious acts against the U.S.

    Based on the invalid and fraudulent status of the Articles, the Trump Defense team should request the Senate vote to dismiss the fake impeachment out of hand. It would not be necessary to acquit the President because the impeachment Articles themselves are fraudulent and unconstitutional on their face.

    Liked by 5 people

  10. Craig Furlong says:

    Make no mistake about what the demorats are about. Their ultimate goal has always been to waste time from now until election day. The more they waste, the GOP is facing a growing danger of losing certain critical members up for re-election.

    This has been the demorats strategy all along. They know they would never be able to impeach the president. So, their only option was & is…to STALL! TO WASTE TIME!

    But they will not succeed. Why?
    Because they really are THE DO-NOTHINGS.

    Liked by 1 person

    • islandpalmtrees says:

      To me this is all about organized crime. They (Pelosi, Schiffn, Biden, and others) are working to maintain control. With their conviction for corruption the organization becomes exposed.

      They must stop the President in order to not see jail time at a minimum.

      They can not stop at impeachment, if it is rejected. So something else will come. Likely assassination attempts..

      Like

  11. polisavvy says:

    Had a liberal tell me that he has read fifteen books (and reread some of them) about the rise of Donald Trump, and he still can’t figure out how or why he was elected. Well, SD has once again illustrated in this posting, another reason why Trump has arisen.

    My friends Trump apoplexy (or TDS) is a dominant trait of the liberal left. Yeah. For sure…

    Like

  12. islandpalmtrees says:

    BREAKING: Mueller’s Convictions in Question After FISA Court Admits At Least 2 Spy Warrants Against Carter Page Were ‘Not Valid’

    Like

  13. seasidemommy says:

    Rules for Radicals Saul Alinsky guide to impeachment

    Like

  14. shilor says:

    Can it be assumed that all actions flowing from the Judicial Committee, including request for documents, etc. are null and void because the whole House did not vote giving Judicial Com. the power to act? Could this result is striking down the two Impeachment charges, making them null and void? And, could this be the last issue President Trump’s lawyers will request to make happen?

    Like

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