2nd Impeachment? House counsel suggests Trump could be impeached again

[Olde Europe]

they are going with what they can prove now. why should they pause for everything all at once?

Good question.

When Trump blocked Duffy's, Mulvaney's, Pompeo's, and Bolton's testimonies, they instructed the House they could go to the courts in order to solve inter-branch disputes.

When judge Jackson ruled in favor of the House in McGahn's case, and they are facing the prospect of losing on the appellate level, they are instructing the courts to stay out of inter-branch fights.

Observing the impeachment inquiry, they whined endlessly about it being unduly hasty.

Now that Pelosi is waiting for the Senate to get their act together, so that the Senate can signal to the House they are ready to welcome the House managers (as described in the rules of Clinton's impeachment), they are calling it overly long, and a farce.

At the rate of Trump's violations of the law and the Constitution, not to mention his oath of office, are surfacing, at any time we're just weeks away from the next Article of Impeachment to be written. Therefore, waiting for that list of Articles to be complete and all-encompassing would amount to impeaching him after he slinks out of office in a hail of jeers.

Not to forget:

They endlessly complained about the secret star chamber proceedings.

When there were public hearings, they endlessly complained about show trials.

They endlessly whined about the absence of due process, and the absence of a defense for the president.

Alt the while GOP committee members complained that, with equal time to question witnesses, they weren't able to function properly as the president's defense team.

Moreover:

They haughtily declined to send the president's defense team when invited to the House Judiciary Committee, because the House committee is so unfair. So, no demonstration of the compelling evidence for the president's innocence for the House.

Now that things are heading for the Senate, and despite clear indications for the president's involvement in the writing of the rules, they opt for "Eff the defense, we're not going to show our compelling evidence for the president's innocence in a trial conducted under rules we've written."


And now imagine, in light of the above, or try to, what our Trumpletons have been swallowing, no questions asked.

 

[Jackson]

WTF? Another impeachment? We are now entering the Twilight zone:

House counsel suggests Trump could be impeached again

"The House is open to the prospect of impeaching President Donald Trump a second time, lawyers for the Judiciary Committee said Monday.
House Counsel Douglas Letter said in a filing in federal court that a second impeachment could be necessary if the House uncovers new evidence that Trump attempted to obstruct investigations of his conduct. Letter made the argument as part of an inquiry by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals about whether Democrats still need testimony from former White House Counsel Don McGahn following the votes last week to charge Trump with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.
"If McGahn’s testimony produces new evidence supporting the conclusion that President Trump committed impeachable offenses that are not covered by the Articles approved by the House, the Committee will proceed accordingly—including, if necessary, by considering whether to recommend new articles of impeachment," Letter wrote."

Well, they are fucking up the first impeachment by not sending them to the Senate. They are complete losers whose willful hate is going to destroy them from within. Let them go and watch them destroy themselves at the ballot box.

 

[Siete]

um, no. there was no impeachment inquiry or trial regarding mueller's investigation.

If there was anything there, then they should and would have included it in the first impeachment.

The very idea of holding back charges from the first impeachment, so that they can be used as a basis for subsequent impeachments when the first fails, pretty much proves what everyone already knows—that this was never about any legitimate legal complaints against the President, but merely an abuse of the process for the purpose of harassing and undermining him.

no dummy - they wanted mcghan 8 months ago - only NOW is it possible because they went to the courts & finally got a ruling in their favor. but you are saying that now isn't a good time? oh well, homey don't play that.

Yet, it's still in court. Go figure.

.

why would that be little kitty? cause donny is appealing it. my my my.... that really makes him look innocent............................. oh did i say innocent? lol...

It's called due process, look it up.

.

DUE PROCESS APPLYS IN CRIMINAL COURTS -

an impeachment isnt criminal its strictly political.

obviously, youre too big of a dumbass to look it up.

 

[OKTexas]

WTF? Another impeachment? We are now entering the Twilight zone:

House counsel suggests Trump could be impeached again

"The House is open to the prospect of impeaching President Donald Trump a second time, lawyers for the Judiciary Committee said Monday.
House Counsel Douglas Letter said in a filing in federal court that a second impeachment could be necessary if the House uncovers new evidence that Trump attempted to obstruct investigations of his conduct. Letter made the argument as part of an inquiry by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals about whether Democrats still need testimony from former White House Counsel Don McGahn following the votes last week to charge Trump with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.
"If McGahn’s testimony produces new evidence supporting the conclusion that President Trump committed impeachable offenses that are not covered by the Articles approved by the House, the Committee will proceed accordingly—including, if necessary, by considering whether to recommend new articles of impeachment," Letter wrote."

All the court said is McGahn has to show up, nothing says he can't still claim executive privilege and not answer questions.

.

EP wasn't extended when he talked to mueller. you can't retroactively impose it & that is the crux. nor can you claim it when a crime was committed.

Were is that written, other than left extremist hate sites?

.

lol...i don't use obviously biased sites, pussy

cat.

CAN TRUMP USE EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE TO BLOCK MCGAHN’S TESTIMONY?

Legal experts said that conversations between a president and the White House counsel were exactly the sort of thing that executive privilege is intended to keep private.

On the other hand, a strong argument could be made that Trump long ago forfeited, or waived, his right to make an executive privilege claim over his conversations with Don McGahn, said Michael Stern, a former congressional lawyer in Washington.

Much like the attorney-client privilege, executive privilege is intended to keep conversations private. Generally speaking, once third parties are told about such conversations, they are no longer secret and the privilege has been waived, legal experts said.

McGahn, then the White House counsel, was allowed to sit for several interviews with Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team and McGahn’s testimony was cited 157 times in Mueller’s 448-page report on Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election and Trump’s attempts to impede that inquiry. That means any executive privilege claim has likely been waived, Stern said.

Explainer: Can Trump use executive privilege to block congressional probes?

yer welcome.

LMAO, there are too many caveats in that BS to make it credible. "could", "likely", sounds like questions for the courts, doesn't it? Also much of McGahn's testimony was to a grand jury, which is secret.

.

 

[OKTexas]

The appearance of partisan piling-on--is not a good one for the Democrats..IMO. You are risking overloading the public and turning them against the left. Offend their sense of fair play at your own risk.

the request for don mcghan's testimony came 8 months ago & donny refused to comply. & it has been publicly mentioned that the 'obstruction of congress' might encompass mueller to demonstrate a pattern.


Top House Democrat wants Mueller findings in impeachment articles against Trump
By Emma Dumain
December 03, 2019 08:47 PM
https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/congress/article237826049.html

Mueller evidence likely to be included in articles of impeachment
Details may be used to show pattern of obstruction
Mueller evidence likely to be included in articles of impeachment
By:Manu Raju and Jeremy Herb, CNN
Posted: Dec 06, 2019 01:02 AM CST
Updated: Dec 06, 2019 07:58 AM CST

Yet that didn't happen, did it?

.

who knows? donny obstructed it all via barr.

Feel free to quote where anything in the Mueller report was cited in the articles. You don't understand English too well, do you?

.

it didn't. what it DID say, was( to paraphrase) was that if anything new arises that can show a pattern of behavior of obstruction --- then it might become an issue. why would you have a problem with that.

Did you check the date on that report, it was pre impeachment, their speculation was incorrect. Get your ESL teacher to explain it to ya.

.

 

[OKTexas]

If there was anything there, then they should and would have included it in the first impeachment.

The very idea of holding back charges from the first impeachment, so that they can be used as a basis for subsequent impeachments when the first fails, pretty much proves what everyone already knows—that this was never about any legitimate legal complaints against the President, but merely an abuse of the process for the purpose of harassing and undermining him.

no dummy - they wanted mcghan 8 months ago - only NOW is it possible because they went to the courts & finally got a ruling in their favor. but you are saying that now isn't a good time? oh well, homey don't play that.

Yet, it's still in court. Go figure.

.

why would that be little kitty? cause donny is appealing it. my my my.... that really makes him look innocent............................. oh did i say innocent? lol...

It's called due process, look it up.

.

yep. all legal means to slow down & clog up the system trying to avoid the inevitable.

The operative word is "legal", deal with it commie. LMAO

.

 

[basquebromance]

Trump is so angry, he is so in love with himself, that whenever he gets accused of not being a legitimate president, he ERUPTS!

 

[hadit]

um, no. there was no impeachment inquiry or trial regarding mueller's investigation.

If there was anything there, then they should and would have included it in the first impeachment.

The very idea of holding back charges from the first impeachment, so that they can be used as a basis for subsequent impeachments when the first fails, pretty much proves what everyone already knows—that this was never about any legitimate legal complaints against the President, but merely an abuse of the process for the purpose of harassing and undermining him.

no dummy - they wanted mcghan 8 months ago - only NOW is it possible because they went to the courts & finally got a ruling in their favor. but you are saying that now isn't a good time? oh well, homey don't play that.

So why didn’t they wait again?

they are going with what they can prove now. why should they pause for everything all at once?

They're complaining because the Senate doesn't want to do their job for them and call witnesses the House didn't call. The question thus becomes, why didn't the House simply wait until they could compel the testimony they wanted? It's not the Senate's job to do it for them.

 

[playtime]

If there was anything there, then they should and would have included it in the first impeachment.

The very idea of holding back charges from the first impeachment, so that they can be used as a basis for subsequent impeachments when the first fails, pretty much proves what everyone already knows—that this was never about any legitimate legal complaints against the President, but merely an abuse of the process for the purpose of harassing and undermining him.

They might try to hold them back from the Senate till after the election to try to take the Senate back....

doubtful. i think pelosi is holding back just long enough for a few (R) senators to vote on the rules to allow witness', & with this latest email by one of the dudes fighting a subpoena, telling the OMB to hold back funds but keep it hush just help that happen or if more info comes out in the coming days.

What makes you think anyone in the senate will cave to the bitches extortion?

.

it will only take 3.

oooOOOOOOooooo.....you calling nancy a bitch?

Wrong again dumbass, three would make it a 50/50 tie, the VP would be called to break the tie. I guess you're too stupid to know the VP is the president of the senate.

.

pence is 'president of the senate' but i don't think he can participate in breaking any tie. that would fall on roberts. m'k... how about 4 then? romney, collins, murkowski, & one more.

 

[beautress]

I think those perpetrating the false narrative impeachment hearings should get a visit from a Presidential advisory board to be named "Homeland Security's Unamerican Activities Commission" to put an end to fraud in high office as the House of Representatives.

These creeps know better, but they're creeps; and creep is as creep does. They have no evidence of any crimes committed by the president except for the extension of their hatred of our President for winning the election and ending their communist takeover of the American people.

Communism is a bad form of government.

 

[playtime]

If there was anything there, then they should and would have included it in the first impeachment.

The very idea of holding back charges from the first impeachment, so that they can be used as a basis for subsequent impeachments when the first fails, pretty much proves what everyone already knows—that this was never about any legitimate legal complaints against the President, but merely an abuse of the process for the purpose of harassing and undermining him.

They might try to hold them back from the Senate till after the election to try to take the Senate back....

doubtful. i think pelosi is holding back just long enough for a few (R) senators to vote on the rules to allow witness', & with this latest email by one of the dudes fighting a subpoena, telling the OMB to hold back funds but keep it hush just help that happen or if more info comes out in the coming days.

What makes you think anyone in the senate will cave to the bitches extortion?

.

it will only take 3.

oooOOOOOOooooo.....you calling nancy a bitch?

They should have used the courts while this was in the House.....but the bitch was in too much of a hurry.
Oh well, they had their chance and blew it....like usual. Trump 2020

it has been in the courts - where you been?

 

[hadit]

"Right now I’m on a Christmas light tour in a very conservative southern city. The tour guide just mentioned Trump getting impeached, everyone applauded. Including the kids." - Sassy Scott Dworkin

i have a 'tuck frump' button on my pocketbook & only one person outa maybe 10 said something negative - the rest liked it & said he's got to go.

That's who you hang out with. Little surprise they would echo your sentiments. People wearing MAGA hats could say the same thing.

 

[playtime]

"Right now I’m on a Christmas light tour in a very conservative southern city. The tour guide just mentioned Trump getting impeached, everyone applauded. Including the kids." - Sassy Scott Dworkin

i have a 'tuck frump' button on my pocketbook & only one person outa maybe 10 said something negative - the rest liked it & said he's got to go.

Do they only show CNN in your facility? LMAO

.

i don't have cable so try again. 'facility'.... how remarkably unoriginal. *yawn*

 

[Olde Europe]

but the bitch was in too much of a hurry.
Oh well, they had their chance and blew it....like usual. Trump 2020

Can someone figure out why there is such a nice, brotherly affinity between Trumpletons and the InCel crowd?

 

[Meister]

They might try to hold them back from the Senate till after the election to try to take the Senate back....

doubtful. i think pelosi is holding back just long enough for a few (R) senators to vote on the rules to allow witness', & with this latest email by one of the dudes fighting a subpoena, telling the OMB to hold back funds but keep it hush just help that happen or if more info comes out in the coming days.

What makes you think anyone in the senate will cave to the bitches extortion?

.

it will only take 3.

oooOOOOOOooooo.....you calling nancy a bitch?

They should have used the courts while this was in the House.....but the bitch was in too much of a hurry.
Oh well, they had their chance and blew it....like usual. Trump 2020

it has been in the courts - where you been?

It's been in the House, not the courts. Pelosi knew they couldn't win in the courts. where you been?

 

[playtime]

"Right now I’m on a Christmas light tour in a very conservative southern city. The tour guide just mentioned Trump getting impeached, everyone applauded. Including the kids." - Sassy Scott Dworkin

i have a 'tuck frump' button on my pocketbook & only one person outa maybe 10 said something negative - the rest liked it & said he's got to go.

That's who you hang out with. Little surprise they would echo your sentiments. People wearing MAGA hats could say the same thing.

not one of them i knew. not one. lol.... nice try though.

 

[playtime]

doubtful. i think pelosi is holding back just long enough for a few (R) senators to vote on the rules to allow witness', & with this latest email by one of the dudes fighting a subpoena, telling the OMB to hold back funds but keep it hush just help that happen or if more info comes out in the coming days.

What makes you think anyone in the senate will cave to the bitches extortion?

.

it will only take 3.

oooOOOOOOooooo.....you calling nancy a bitch?

They should have used the courts while this was in the House.....but the bitch was in too much of a hurry.
Oh well, they had their chance and blew it....like usual. Trump 2020

it has been in the courts - where you been?

It's been in the House, not the courts. Pelosi knew they couldn't win in the courts. where you been?

all the defied subpoenas have gone to court mcghan was among the first 8 months ago....& it finally got ruled on a couple weeks ago. he wasn't the first.

 

[OldLady]

WTF? Another impeachment? We are now entering the Twilight zone:

House counsel suggests Trump could be impeached again

"The House is open to the prospect of impeaching President Donald Trump a second time, lawyers for the Judiciary Committee said Monday.
House Counsel Douglas Letter said in a filing in federal court that a second impeachment could be necessary if the House uncovers new evidence that Trump attempted to obstruct investigations of his conduct. Letter made the argument as part of an inquiry by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals about whether Democrats still need testimony from former White House Counsel Don McGahn following the votes last week to charge Trump with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.
"If McGahn’s testimony produces new evidence supporting the conclusion that President Trump committed impeachable offenses that are not covered by the Articles approved by the House, the Committee will proceed accordingly—including, if necessary, by considering whether to recommend new articles of impeachment," Letter wrote."

Oh good Lord.

 

[playtime]

WTF? Another impeachment? We are now entering the Twilight zone:

House counsel suggests Trump could be impeached again

"The House is open to the prospect of impeaching President Donald Trump a second time, lawyers for the Judiciary Committee said Monday.
House Counsel Douglas Letter said in a filing in federal court that a second impeachment could be necessary if the House uncovers new evidence that Trump attempted to obstruct investigations of his conduct. Letter made the argument as part of an inquiry by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals about whether Democrats still need testimony from former White House Counsel Don McGahn following the votes last week to charge Trump with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.
"If McGahn’s testimony produces new evidence supporting the conclusion that President Trump committed impeachable offenses that are not covered by the Articles approved by the House, the Committee will proceed accordingly—including, if necessary, by considering whether to recommend new articles of impeachment," Letter wrote."

All the court said is McGahn has to show up, nothing says he can't still claim executive privilege and not answer questions.

.

EP wasn't extended when he talked to mueller. you can't retroactively impose it & that is the crux. nor can you claim it when a crime was committed.

Were is that written, other than left extremist hate sites?

.

lol...i don't use obviously biased sites, pussy

cat.

CAN TRUMP USE EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE TO BLOCK MCGAHN’S TESTIMONY?

Legal experts said that conversations between a president and the White House counsel were exactly the sort of thing that executive privilege is intended to keep private.

On the other hand, a strong argument could be made that Trump long ago forfeited, or waived, his right to make an executive privilege claim over his conversations with Don McGahn, said Michael Stern, a former congressional lawyer in Washington.

Much like the attorney-client privilege, executive privilege is intended to keep conversations private. Generally speaking, once third parties are told about such conversations, they are no longer secret and the privilege has been waived, legal experts said.

McGahn, then the White House counsel, was allowed to sit for several interviews with Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team and McGahn’s testimony was cited 157 times in Mueller’s 448-page report on Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election and Trump’s attempts to impede that inquiry. That means any executive privilege claim has likely been waived, Stern said.

Explainer: Can Trump use executive privilege to block congressional probes?

yer welcome.

LMAO, there are too many caveats in that BS to make it credible. "could", "likely", sounds like questions for the courts, doesn't it? Also much of McGahn's testimony was to a grand jury, which is secret.

.

only secret cause donny instructed barr to keep it that way. if barr petitions the court to open it up - then it would happen. why won't tinkles let barr do it?

 

[Meister]

but the bitch was in too much of a hurry.
Oh well, they had their chance and blew it....like usual. Trump 2020

Can someone figure out why there is such a nice, brotherly affinity between Trumpletons and the InCel crowd?

Well, I'm trying to figure out why there is a brotherly affinity between democrats and abortion. Maybe we can work together and
figure them out.