╌>

Judiciary Panel Advances Impeachment Inquiry of Trump as Doubts Linger

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  john-russell  •  5 years ago  •  55 comments

Judiciary Panel Advances Impeachment Inquiry of Trump as Doubts Linger
"It has been an impeachment inquiry and it continues to be...We are examining the various malfeasances of the president with the view toward possibly, the possibility, of introducing, of recommending articles of impeachment to the House. That is what an impeachment inquiry is," Nadler told reporters in the Capitol Monday. 

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



The House Judiciary Committee voted on Thursday in favor of a new resolution formalizing the impeachment inquiry and further intensifying its investigation into President Trump amid a growing chorus of Democrats to hold the president accountable for his actions. The vote fell along party lines 24-17. 

While mostly technical, the committee's vote also moves to install new procedures for its inquiry, allowing committee chairman Jerry Nadler to designate which committee and subcommittee hearings are related to the probe, give committee counsel extra time to question witnesses and receive evidence in closed executive session. 

"The resolution before us represents the necessary next step in our investigation of corruption, obstruction, and abuse of power," Nadler said in a statement before Thursday's meeting. 

Nadler, on Monday, referred to his committee's actions as an "impeachment inquiry," but he did not refer to the inquiry as "formal."

"It has been an impeachment inquiry and it continues to be...We are examining the various malfeasances of the president with the view toward possibly, the possibility, of introducing, of recommending articles of impeachment to the House. That is what an impeachment inquiry is," Nadler told reporters in the Capitol Monday. 

House Judiciary Republican aides reiterated that they do not believe the new procedures the majority is slated to formalize expands in any way the power of the panel, they said in a conference call with reporters Wednesday. "There is nothing novel," one aide said. The new procedures would have "zero impact" on House decorum rules regarding accusations against the president that members can discuss openly, another aide added. 

The aides sought to downplay the move by the majority, saying the main reason the new procedures are being authorized is that Democrats don't have enough support to initiate a "formal" impeachment inquiry through a resolution approved by a full vote on the House floor. 

At this point, a majority of House Democrats now support opening an impeachment inquiry. There has been some confusion over whether the Judiciary Committee's investigation is a formal one. Nadler in his statement addressed ongoing confusion over the semantics of just what his committee intends to do. 

"This Committee is engaged in an investigation that will allow us to determine whether to recommend articles of impeachment with respect to President Trump. Some call this process an impeachment inquiry. Some call it an impeachment investigation. There is no legal difference between these terms, and I no longer care to argue about the nomenclature," he said. 

"But let me clear up any remaining doubt: The conduct under investigation poses a threat to our democracy. We have an obligation to respond to this threat. And we are doing so."

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has continued to urge her colleagues to pursue other means to holding the president and administration accountable, rather than impeachment. Pelosi has been adamant in her talks with the Democratic caucus that the public still isn't supportive of taking such a serious step. Nadler argues that his committee is bound to continue its probe.

"As Members of Congress-and, in particular, as members of the House Judiciary Committee-we have a responsibility to investigate each of these allegations and to determine the appropriate remedy. That responsibility includes making a judgment about whether to recommend articles of impeachment," Nadler said. "That judgment cannot be based on our feelings about President Trump. It should not be a personal reaction to misguided policies or personal behavior. It must be a decision based on the evidence before us, and the evidence that keeps coming in."

Grace Segers, Kimberly Brown and Camilo Montoya-Galvez contributed reporting. 


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1  seeder  JohnRussell    5 years ago

He's going to be impeached because they are going to find that he committed impeachable offenses. 

I actually believe this will increase the Democratic turnout in the election next year. 

I don't see many people voting for Trump because they feel sorry for him because he was impeached. 

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
1.1  Ozzwald  replied to  JohnRussell @1    5 years ago
He's going to be impeached because they are going to find that he committed impeachable offenses.  I actually believe this will increase the Democratic turnout in the election next year. 

I agree, somewhat.  Republicans will protect Trump no matter what the charges show, so Trump will not be impeached in the Senate.  But if the Democrats do a good job with showcasing the case behind the impeachment, it should rile up the Democratic and Independent bases to cause a larger turnout.

Democrats don't need to remove Trump from the presidency, that just need to demonstrate the utter corruption that is Trump and show how Congressional Republicans are protecting that corruption at the cost of the country's democracy.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Participates
1.2  1stwarrior  replied to  JohnRussell @1    5 years ago

Why John, Why???  Why do you consistently beat a dead horse?  It's almost as if you've lost all ability to live in the real world instead of your fantasy world of "slaying the Dragon".

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1.2.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  1stwarrior @1.2    5 years ago
Why John, Why???  Why do you consistently beat a dead horse?  It's almost as if you've lost all ability to live in the real world instead of your fantasy world of "slaying the Dragon"

A dead horse? This is a major national news story from THIS MORNING. 

Just stop 1st. Whatever you are trying to do isnt working. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.3  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @1    5 years ago
He's going to be impeached because they are going to find that he committed impeachable offenses. 

Wrong!   It's all for show and it's for that special wing of the democratic party that must have impeachment. Enjoy it John. It goes nowhere and it is designed that way!

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
2  Sean Treacy    5 years ago

Democrats can't even make a coherent argument for impeachment. Steny Hoyer, the second ranking Democrat in the House, just said no impeachment inquiry is underway. 

August was supposed to be their big month to gain popular support for impeachment .  Whoops!

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
2.1  JBB  replied to  Sean Treacy @2    5 years ago

The question is not whether Trump has committed impeachable crimes or whether the Democrats have enough evidence to impeach him. He did and they do. The real question is, do Moscow Mithch and the damn gop in the US Senate have the courage, love of country and balls needed to do the right thing and convict the no good miserable fraud, or not?

Are there still enough BIG R Republicans left to end our national nightmare?

 
 
 
lib50
Professor Silent
2.1.3  lib50  replied to  XDm9mm @2.1.2    5 years ago

The evidence we've all seen and heard, and more is being hidden.  Perhaps you should look up what impeachment is about.  Its not the same as indictment.  Investigations are about uncovering what is hidden.  In PABOTUS's case, he hides everything and lies about it,  so all is suspect.  Proof is after investigation is complete (and Muelller specifically did NOT complete his because he couldn't indict a sitting pres).  We know gop loves investigations (hello Benghazi), so lets just get going.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Expert
2.1.6  MrFrost  replied to  XDm9mm @2.1.2    5 years ago

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
2.1.8  Sean Treacy  replied to  lib50 @2.1.3    5 years ago

"Hidden Evidence!"

that's about sums up how worthless this is,

 
 
 
lib50
Professor Silent
2.1.9  lib50  replied to  XDm9mm @2.1.5    5 years ago
Please be SPECIFIC as to what "evidence" you've seen and heard. 

According to gop standards for evidence, all I need is to say 'someone said', or 'my friend John said...'  but I feel generous today.

Also make sure you understand the difference standards for impeachment and indictment.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Participates
3  Paula Bartholomew    5 years ago

Bout damned time.

 
 
 
It Is ME
Masters Guide
3.1  It Is ME  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @3    5 years ago
Bout damned time.

" Possibly " ! jrSmiley_18_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
It Is ME
Masters Guide
5  It Is ME    5 years ago

"We are examining the various malfeasances of the president with the view toward possibly , the possibility , of introducing, of recommending articles of impeachment to the House"

In other words …… Democrats don't have crap , but Democrats are gonna continue the crap anyway….. just for the crap of it ! jrSmiley_13_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
lib50
Professor Silent
5.1  lib50  replied to  It Is ME @5    5 years ago

They learned from the pros, thank conservatives.  Except this time Trump's corruption will be on full display.  Won't be easy to deflect from the daily swamp pus rising to the top.

 
 
 
lib50
Professor Silent
5.1.2  lib50  replied to    5 years ago

Does it burn to think that if Michelle had been a male her penis would have been so much bigger than Trump's?  Or that republicans can't get Trump's mouth off Putin's so they can get their turn?  Trying to get a handle on the dick obsession you have.  

 
 
 
It Is ME
Masters Guide
5.1.4  It Is ME  replied to  lib50 @5.1    5 years ago
They learned from the pros, thank conservatives.

One "Bad" turn, deserves another I suppose ?

"Except this time Trump's corruption will be on full display."

The Dems have been trying to …. "display it"..... even before Trump was elected. Dems need to upgrade their TV's. We have HD Color now yaknow !

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
5.1.6  Sean Treacy  replied to    5 years ago

allowing Putin to annex Crimea! and then allowing Putin to bomb Americans in Syria, and then allowing Putin to interfere in the election. 

Exactly! The way Trump allows Putin to repeatedly violate cease fires in Syria and then begs him to sign yet another worthless cease fire by offering even further concessions, is truly amazing.  Only a Putin puppet would do those things. 

 
 
 
livefreeordie
Junior Silent
7  livefreeordie    5 years ago

The clown parade AKA the Democrat Congress continues to put on their circus to the amusement of only those who applaud their nonsense.

While I agree that Impeachment is purely a political act, engaging in impeachment solely because you lost an election only further destroys what's left of our Constitutional Republic

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
8  Tacos!    5 years ago

The way Nadler is going about this is just so slimy. They can't officially call it an impeachment inquiry because there is no political support for that. There is no political support because there is no evidence to support it. No one pursuing this has any credibility because they have been talking impeachment since before Trump was even elected and after two years of Russia investigation, they disregard the results.

It is obvious to most people now that this is purely a politically motivated fishing expedition . Only the most extreme die hard partisans still treat this as a just and fair investigation. 

 
 

Who is online

shona1
Snuffy
bugsy
CB
Ed-NavDoc
George
Sean Treacy
JohnRussell
Thomas


86 visitors