US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 86, has been admitted to hospital suffering chills and a fever, the Supreme Court said in a statement:

SCOTUS – Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was admitted to Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, Maryland, last night after experiencing chills and fever earlier in the day. She was initially evaluated at Sibley Memorial Hospital in Washington, D.C. before being transferred to Johns Hopkins Hospital for further evaluation and treatment of any possible infection.
With intravenous antibiotics and fluids, her symptoms have abated and she expects to be released from the hospital as early as Sunday morning. Further updates will be made when available. (link)

There are three current court cases that touch upon whether the House “impeachment inquiry” is following a constitutional process.

♦The first case is the House Oversight effort to gain President Trumps’ tax returns as part of their impeachment ‘inquiry’ and oversight.  That case is currently on-hold (10-day stay) in the Supreme Court; outcome pending.
♦The second case is the House Judiciary Committee (HJC) effort to gain the grand jury information from the Mueller investigation.  The decision by DC Judge Beryl Howell was also stayed by a three member DC Appellate court.  Oral arguments were November 12th, the decision is pending. [Depending on outcome, could also go to SCOTUS]
♦The third case is the HJC effort to force the testimony of former White House legal counsel Don McGahn.  Issue: subpoena validity.  The HJC has asked for an expedited ruling. Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson has announced she will deliver her ruling on Monday, November 25th:

WASHINGTON DC – […] “The Judiciary Committee anticipates holding hearings after HPSCI’s public hearings have concluded and would aim to obtain Mr. McGahn’s testimony at that time,” the committee wrote, referring to the impeachment inquiry hearings led by the House Intelligence Committee. “Thus, there is an urgent need for final resolution of the matter now pending before this Court.”

(more…)

The Supreme Court has halted a lower court ruling that granted the Committee on Oversight and Reform access to President Trump’s tax returns.  However, that’s not necessarily the lede.
The issue at stake is whether the legislative branch can penetrate the constitutional firewall which exists within the separation of powers. The House issued a subpoena in February for eight years of the president’s tax returns, which the Committee then later argued was part of the September House impeachment investigation.

All of the surrounding court rulings are predicated on accepting a constitutional process for an official impeachment investigation is underway.  However, the Supreme Court will hear arguments that will likely challenge that assertion.  To wit, within the buried lede to the background issue we find this paragraph:

On Monday, Douglas Letter, general counsel for the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, had sent a letter to the court, agreeing to a brief 10-day stay while the parties filed their court papers debating the need for an injunction while the case is being considered. (link)

(more…)

There is an important granular aspect to the validity of the House impeachment process that few are paying attention to.  If the HJC loses this case in the DC Appellate Court, it means there is no constitutional foundation recognized to the “impeachment inquiry.”
Without the constitutional recognition of the judicial branch then: (a) Pelosi/Lawfare have to restart the process with a genuine House vote; or (b) the ongoing impeachment process will have no recognized constitutional standing; and (c) the Senate could ignore any House impeachment vote, cast without recognized constitutional standing.

BACKSTORY: On October 25th DC Judge Beryl Howell granted the House Judiciary Committee (HJC) request for legal authority to receive 6e grand jury material underlying the Mueller report.
Additionally, and most importantly, within the Howell decision she officially recognized the HJC effort was predicated on a constitutional impeachment process.  In essence Howell’s opinion granted the HJC with “judicial enforcement authority.”
The DOJ moved to appeal the decision and requested a “stay” pending appeal.  Judge Howell rejected the DOJ “stay” motion.
The DOJ then appealed to the DC Court of Appeals.  A panel of three judges issued an “administrative stay”, blocking enforcement of the Howell ruling while the appeal was reviewed.  The DC Appellate Court has now scheduled the arguments within the appeal.
(more…)

I’m going to attempt to remove the legal linguistics and explain what appears to be a highly predictable process most are ignoring.
BASELINE – After the 2018 mid-terms, and in preparation for the “impeachment” strategy, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler hired Lawfare group members to become House committee staff…. Chairman Schiff hired former SDNY U.S. Attorney Daniel Goldman (link), and Chairman Nadler hired  Obama Administration lawyer Norm Eisen and criminal defense attorney Barry Berke (link).  House Speaker Nancy Pelosi then hired Douglas Letter as House General Counsel – all are within the Lawfare network.
♦On October 25th DC Judge Beryl Howell granted the House Judiciary Committee (HJC) request for legal authority to receive 6e grand jury material underlying the Mueller report.
Additionally, within the Howell decision she officially recognized the HJC effort was predicated on a constitutional impeachment process.
In essence Howell’s opinion granted the HJC with “judicial enforcement authority.”
♦The DOJ moved to appeal the decision and requested a “stay” pending appeal.  Judge Howell rejected the “stay” motion.
The DOJ appealed to the DC Court of Appeals.  A panel of three judges issued an “administrative stay”, blocking enforcement of the Howell ruling while the appeal was reviewed.
The temporary administrative stay was granted to freeze the status quo while the court considers whether to grant a longer stay that would remain in effect until the DOJ appeal is argued or decided (deadline tomorrow).  The outcome is pending.  Judge Merrick Garland is the Chief Judge of the DC Appeals court.
(more…)

Senator Lindsey Graham, who has increasingly come under pressure for doing nothing as the powerful Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, announces today that he will be abdicating his chairmanship immediately after the 2020 presidential election:

(Via Politico) Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) plans to hand the chairmanship of the Senate Judiciary Committee back to Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa.) in the next Congress.  Graham took over the panel this year from Grassley, who left to chair the Senate Finance Committee.

(more…)

Repost by Request – with intro:   After the 2018 mid-terms, and in preparation for the “impeachment” strategy, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler hired Lawfare group members to become House committee staff.
Chairman Schiff hired former SDNY U.S. Attorney Daniel Goldman (link), and Chairman Nadler hired  Obama Administration lawyer Norm Eisen and criminal defense attorney Barry Berke (link).  House Speaker Nancy Pelosi then hired Douglas Letter as House General Counsel – all are within the Lawfare network.

[Barry Berke, left and Norm Eisen, right – pictured exiting the HSCI scif with Jerry Nadler on the same day Pelosi’s “Impeachment Inquiry” Resolution was released, 10/29/19]

After Goldman, Eisen, Berke and Letter were hired in late 2018, Pelosi then went about changing the Rules of the House in January ’19.  Few were paying attention until recently.
In the last month many people have surmised that Pelosi and Schiff moved to utilize the Ukraine/NSC impeachment angle *after* the Mueller angle for impeachment ran into trouble. However, CTH research (widely criticized in 2018) doesn’t reflect the Whistle-blower impeachment plan as an ‘add-on’.  Instead, what we see is the use of the HPSCI; and the use of embeds within National Security Council staff; by design.  The Schiff events of today were always part of a prior planned design.
Only two committees hired Lawfare staff in 2018: Judiciary (Eisen & Berke) and HPSCI (Goldman).  This evidences a 2018 plan to use the Judiciary and HPSCI for the impeachment process as designed by the Lawfare contractors.  This design is also outlined in the year of public advice from the mother-ship, Lawfare.
They impeachment crew always planned to use the House Intelligence Committee; and they always planned to use activated sleeper cells within the National Security Staff.  None of this is organic; none of this current action was contingent upon a Trump phone call.  The whistle-blower approach was always going to be used; the only issue was: ‘how’?
(more…)

Nancy Pelosi continues to mislead her ‘impeachment’ constituents.  Unfortunately the compliant media is refusing to hold her accountable.  House Democrat leadership has taken a climate assessment of democrat House members and Speaker Pelosi announced they will not hold a House impeachment authorization vote.   As a direct and specific consequence all committee subpoenas do 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 House votes to authorize an impeachment inquiry.
Absent a vote to authorize, the Legislative Branch has not established compulsion authority (aka judicial enforcement authority), as they attempt 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) can only send out request letters. The compliance is discretionary based on the outlook of the recipient.
(more…)

By now everyone is familiar with the Lawfare network; an alliance of ideological political interests inside and outside government who use the law to achieve their objectives.  [Specific Example Here]

During the Obama administration the Lawfare group: (1) weaponized the IRS for political targeting; (2) weaponized the DOJ and FBI for political targeting; (3) weaponized the intelligence community for political activism; (4) created new legal theories around ‘disparate impact’ to weaponize the National Labor Relations Board; and generally used embedded officials to advance far-left political interests across the spectrum of govt.

After they lost the 2016 election the Lawfare group immediately: (1) worked to delegitimize the presidency of Donald Trump; (2) delegitimize National Security Adviser General Flynn; (3) target, disempower and isolate AG Jeff Session; (4) delegitimize AG Bill Barr and the institution of the FBI outside their control; (5) delegitimize DHS, Border Patrol and Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE); and (6) delegitimize any institution or office that would now be removing or overturning their former Lawfare constructs.
What we are seeing today from the Lawfare Alliance appears as a designed effort to continue this overall agenda; now focused on delegitimizing the Supreme Court of the United States.

(more…)

The supreme court has upheld President Trump’s immigration enforcement policy that denies asylum claims to migrants who travel through safe nations to reach the U.S.

(Via AP) […] The justices’ order late Wednesday undoes a lower-court ruling that had blocked the new asylum policy in some states along the southern border. The policy is meant to deny asylum to anyone who passes through another country on the way to the U.S. without seeking protection there. (more)

(more…)